freshboi88:
Truth is when we begin to engage these protestants and test their understanding of scripture, they will begin to foam in the mouth, but catholics let's not glorify them with replies....the catholic church is still at d centre of Christianity in d world today, no matter how the church is bashed, it will still remain one....not even modernization can change its sacred traditions.... That to me is wonderful

Most Def, people will also find that this same church that is hated so much is the main voice for pro life , main voice for standing by moral norms in the world, outside of any government it is the largest provider of schools, hospitals, social services etc.
If this isn't so called 'bible believing ', I don't know what is.

They'll pick of traditional christian beliefs(that have been agreed by the church as led by the holy spirit ) and term these with all sorts of names.

!!

btoks:

It's no distraction, we all want to learn where the church that Jesus establised is. Where are the true christians that you've referred ? I'm assuming these people must exist and can be traced to the apostles.

So if we come out of the Catholic Church, where exactly do we go ?

We need clear answers please

OK sir. Let me believe you are sincere. The Church Christ established started with the twelve, then the seventy, then one hundred and twenty at the Upper Room when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost. Then the sermon of Apostle Peter led to the addition of about three thousand souls. Then persecution broke out with Stephen being stoned to death and the disciples (the Church) was scattered and they went everywhere preaching the word as instructed by Christ. Then came the conversion of Saul of Tarsus who spearheaded the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles (though Peter was the first to reach out to Cornelius and some other Gentiles following the revelation he got from God). On and on until the gospel got to us. My point is that the Church of Christ did not have any denominational tag. It comprises of all who have encountered Christ's saving grace and have surrendered to His will alone and continue in His word. Today, we have members of the universal Church - all those whose names are in the Lamb's Book of Life and who are abiding in His word scattered across several denominations. But one common denominator among the real Christians who are members of the true Church (not a particular denomination) is complete allegiance to Christ and His word. Those who call Him "Lord, Lord" but do not obey His word as contained on the Scriptures are not members of His Church irrespective of their denominations (Luke 6:46). We were all born into sin by nature and have been sinners by choice but Christ came to save, deliver and rescue us from sin and it's consequences. If a sinner repents from sin and disobedience and turns to Christ as Saviour, such will be forgiven, cleansed and saved with his/her name written in the Book of life and automatically becomes a member of Christ's universal Church. Such a one will be hungry for the truth and thus will desire the sincere milk of the word so as to grow (1st Peter 2:1-3). Such a saved soul will not want to have anything with sin of any form, idol worship, syncretism, falsehood, hypocrisy or deception. Like begets like. The Spirit of truth in the such a Christian will draw him/her to only where the truth of Scriptures is taught and where the leaders and the majority are apparently living by the undiluted truth. As he/she learns the truth, he/she will be convicted of his sins/her and errors. He/she will not argue or debate with the word. He/she will simply repent of his/her ignorance and make immediate amends. This is what happened to me some 18 years ago. It is not for me to direct anyone where to go. Let the Spirit of God direct you. Thank you.

UnchangeableGod:
Sir, your request is a needless distraction. There have always been true and false Christians in every era. Knowing the names of the members of the true or fake Church is inconsequential.What matters is that the true ones obey the Lord only and they are the Church of Christ while the fake/backslidden ones follow their own devises/the doctrines of men. They are married to the world system. They engage in syncretism and other unscriptural practices. They may arrogate any title to themselves but "by their fruits ye shall know them" and "any anyone that mentions the name of the Lord must depart from iniquity" (Matthew 7:15-20; 2nd Timothy 2:19). You have a choice to repent, stop defending the falsehood in the apostate Roman Catholic Church and come out from among them for your eternal good. Thanks.

it is not a needless distraction.


If you claim the real Church is different from the Catholic Church and exists till our time, then it follows that you should be able to show us these real Christians all through the centuries.


unless you are lying and you have no proof for your claims... which mean you're peddling lies someone told you.

UnchangeableGod:
OK sir. Let me believe you are sincere. The Church Christ established started with the twelve, then the seventy, then one hundred and twenty at the Upper Room when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost. Then the sermon of Apostle Peter led to the addition of about three thousand souls. Then persecution broke out with Stephen being stoned to death and the disciples (the Church) was scattered and they went everywhere preaching the word as instructed by Christ. Then came the conversion of Saul of Tarsus who spearheaded the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles (though Peter was the first to reach out to Cornelius and some other Gentiles following the revelation he got from God). On and on until the gospel got to us. My point is that the Church of Christ did not have any denominational tag. It comprises of all who have encountered Christ's saving grace and have surrendered to His will alone and continue in His word. Today, we have members of the universal Church - all those whose names are in the Lamb's Book of Life and who are abiding in His word scattered across several denominations. But one common denominator among the real Christians who are members of the true Church (not a particular denomination) is complete allegiance to Christ and His word. Those who call Him "Lord, Lord" but do not obey His word as contained on the Scriptures are not members of His Church irrespective of their denominations (Luke 6:46). We were all born into sin by nature and have been sinners by choice but Christ came to save, deliver and rescue us from sin and it's consequences. If a sinner repents from sin and disobedience and turns to Christ as Saviour, such will be forgiven, cleansed and saved with his/her name written in the Book of life and automatically becomes a member of Christ's universal Church. Such a one will be hungry for the truth and thus will desire the sincere milk of the word so as to grow (1st Peter 2:1-3). Such a saved soul will not want to have anything with sin of any form, idol worship, syncretism, falsehood, hypocrisy or deception. Like begets like. The Spirit of truth in the such a Christian will draw him/her to only where the truth of Scriptures is taught and where the leaders and the majority are apparently living by the undiluted truth. As he/she learns the truth, he/she will be convicted of his sins/her and errors. He/she will not argue or debate with the word. He/she will simply repent of his/her ignorance and make immediate amends. This is what happened to me some 18 years ago. It is not for me to direct anyone where to go. Let the Spirit of God direct you. Thank you.

you believe the Church continued after the apostles died and this church isn't the Catholic Church. please give me a few names of those none Catholic Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century

UnchangeableGod:
OK sir. Let me believe you are sincere. The Church Christ established started with the twelve, then the seventy, then one hundred and twenty at the Upper Room when the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost. Then the sermon of Apostle Peter led to the addition of about three thousand souls. Then persecution broke out with Stephen being stoned to death and the disciples (the Church) was scattered and they went everywhere preaching the word as instructed by Christ. Then came the conversion of Saul of Tarsus who spearheaded the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles (though Peter was the first to reach out to Cornelius and some other Gentiles following the revelation he got from God). On and on until the gospel got to us. My point is that the Church of Christ did not have any denominational tag. It comprises of all who have encountered Christ's saving grace and have surrendered to His will alone and continue in His word. Today, we have members of the universal Church - all those whose names are in the Lamb's Book of Life and who are abiding in His word scattered across several denominations. But one common denominator among the real Christians who are members of the true Church (not a particular denomination) is complete allegiance to Christ and His word. Those who call Him "Lord, Lord" but do not obey His word as contained on the Scriptures are not members of His Church irrespective of their denominations (Luke 6:46). We were all born into sin by nature and have been sinners by choice but Christ came to save, deliver and rescue us from sin and it's consequences. If a sinner repents from sin and disobedience and turns to Christ as Saviour, such will be forgiven, cleansed and saved with his/her name written in the Book of life and automatically becomes a member of Christ's universal Church. Such a one will be hungry for the truth and thus will desire the sincere milk of the word so as to grow (1st Peter 2:1-3). Such a saved soul will not want to have anything with sin of any form, idol worship, syncretism, falsehood, hypocrisy or deception. Like begets like. The Spirit of truth in the such a Christian will draw him/her to only where the truth of Scriptures is taught and where the leaders and the majority are apparently living by the undiluted truth. As he/she learns the truth, he/she will be convicted of his sins/her and errors. He/she will not argue or debate with the word. He/she will simply repent of his/her ignorance and make immediate amends. This is what happened to me some 18 years ago. It is not for me to direct anyone where to go. Let the Spirit of God direct you. Thank you.

Thanks for your response although the development of early christianity  was not as simple as you've stated. Even when the apostles were available,  some groups were already teaching another other gospel.(see 2Peter 2). Heresy was always cropping up and it was very important that christians new which was the true church  (with true teaching) and the pedigree back to the Apostles.


We had docetism/ gnostics who had their own view of Jesus and thought that Jesus was not a real man but spirit. That his crucifixion was just an illusion.

We had Arianism that believed Jesus wasn't divine.

We had Nestorianism with their own view of Jesus as separate man and different from the Divine Son of God.
So many other heretic teachings

If you go back to the early church fathers like Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus etc, from the 1st and 2nd centuries, you'll find in their writings that they were pointing christians to the true church which had apostolic succession amongst all the heretical views of the day.  That church still exists today

Ubenedictus:


you believe the Church continued after the apostles died and this church isn't the Catholic Church. please give me a few names of those none Catholic Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century

For the records, the Apostles of Christ were not 'Catholic Christians' sir. The disciples of Christ were called Christians for being like Christ (Acts 11:19-30). I follow their teachings and examples because they were Christians. If Peter and co were 'Catholic Christians' as you erroneously infer, they would have preached salvation through other names apart from that of Christ (Acts 4:10-12), they would have been bowing to images of 'Mary', they would have preached Purgatory, they would have been paying for indulgences and praying for the dead, they would have asked angels and the dead 'saints' to pray for them, they would have observed oracular confessions, Apostle Peter wouldn't have married, they would have baptized infants etc in the manner of the present day Roman Catholics. Apostle Peter and co did not practice such, so they were not Roman Catholics. They were simply Christians following the footsteps of Christ, Our Saviour and Lord. Thanks.

btoks:


Thanks for your response although the development of early christianity  was not as simple as you've stated. Even when the apostles were available,  some groups were already teaching another other gospel.(see 2Peter 2). Heresy was always cropping up and it was very important that christians new which was the true church  (with true teaching) and the pedigree back to the Apostles.


We had docetism/ gnostics who had their own view of Jesus and thought that Jesus was not a real man but spirit. That his crucifixion was just an illusion.

We had Arianism that believed Jesus wasn't divine.

We had Nestorianism with their own view of Jesus as separate man and different from the Divine Son of God.
So many other heretic teachings

If you go back to the early church fathers like Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus etc, from the 1st and 2nd centuries, you'll find in their writings that they were pointing christians to the true church which had apostolic succession amongst all the heretical views of the day.  That church still exists today

Sir, are you inferring that Ignatius of Anthioch, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus etc taught the doctrine of Purgatory, bowed down to images, interceded through 'Mary' and the dead 'saints', were forced not to marry, baptised infants, observed oracular confessions etc? If so then they were actually as heretical as others you pointed out. The true Christians and Church did not and will not observe such. Thanks.

UnchangeableGod:
For the records, the Apostles of Christ were not 'Catholic Christians' sir. The disciples of Christ were called Christians for being like Christ (Acts 11:19-30). I follow their teachings and examples because they were Christians. If Peter and co were 'Catholic Christians' as you erroneously infer, they would have preached salvation through other names apart from that of Christ (Acts 4:10-12), they would have been bowing to images of 'Mary', they would have preached Purgatory, they would have been paying for indulgences and praying for the dead, they would have asked angels and the dead 'saints' to pray for them, they would have observed oracular confessions, Apostle Peter wouldn't have married, they would have baptized infants etc in the manner of the present day Roman Catholics. Apostle Peter and co did not practice such, so they were not Roman Catholics. They were simply Christians following the footsteps of Christ, Our Saviour and Lord. Thanks.

this is the question I asked you... stop dodging

you believe the Church continued after the apostles
died and this church isn't the Catholic Church.
please give me a few names of those none Catholic
Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century

What the Church doesn't want you to know.

Up until the First Council of Nicaea, the Roman aristocracy primarily worshipped two Greek gods -Apollo and Zeus- but the great bulk of common people idolized either Julius Caesar or Mithras (the Romanized version of the Persian deity Mithra ).
Caesar was deified by the Roman Senate after his death (15 March 44 BC) and subsequently venerated as "the Divine Julius".
The word "Savior" was affixed to his name, its literal meaning being "one who sows the seed", i.e., he was a phallic god.
Julius Caesar was hailed as, " God made manifest and universal Savior of human life", and his successor Augustus was called the "ancestral God and Savior of the whole human race"
(Man and his Gods, Homer Smith, Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1952).

Emperor Nero (54-68), whose original name was Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus (37-68), was immortalized on his coins as the "Savior of mankind" (ibid.).
The Divine Julius as Roman Savior and "Father of the Empire" was considered "God" among the Roman rabble for more than 300 years. He was the deity in some Western presbyters' texts, but was not recognized in Eastern or Oriental writings.

Constantine's intention at Nicaea was to create an entirely new god for his empire who would unite all religious factions under one deity. Presbyters were asked to debate and decide who their new god would be. Delegates argued among themselves, expressing personal motives for inclusion of particular writings that promoted the finer traits of their own special deity.

Throughout the meeting, howling factions were immersed in heated debates, and the names of 53 gods were tabled for discussion.
"As yet, no God had been selected by the council, and so they balloted in order to determine that matter... For one year and five months the balloting lasted..."
(God's Book of Eskra, Prof. S. L. MacGuire's translation, Salisbury, 1922, chapter xlviii, paragraphs 36, 41).

At the end of that time, Constantine returned to the gathering to discover that the presbyters had not agreed on a new deity but had balloted down to a shortlist of five prospects :
i. Caesar
ii. Krishna
iii. Mithra
iv. Horus
v. Zeus
(Historia Ecclesiastica, Eusebius, c. 325).

Constantine was the ruling spirit at Nicaea and he ultimately decided upon a new god for them. To involve British factions, he ruled that the name of the great Druid god, Hesus , be joined with the Eastern Savior-god, Krishna ( Krishna is Sanskrit for
Christ ), and thus Hesus Krishna would be the official name of the new Roman god.

A vote was taken and it was with a majority show of hands (161 votes to 157) that both divinities became one God . Following longstanding heathen custom, Constantine used the official gathering and the Roman apotheosis decree to legally deify two deities as one, and did so by democratic consent. A new god was proclaimed and "officially" ratified by Constantine ( Acta Concilii Nicaeni, 1618).

That purely political act of deification effectively and legally placed Hesus and Krishna among the Roman gods as one individual composite.

That abstraction lent Earthly existence to amalgamated doctrines for the Empire's new religion; and because there was no letter "J" in alphabets until around the ninth century, the name subsequently evolved into " Jesus Christ".

WHO WAS THIS? This was Chrishna (Krishna) of India, who according to tradition was crucified approximately 1200 B.C. Incidentally, he had a “virgin” birth, either by a hair of the Hindu God Vishnu entering his mother’s womb, or in another version of the myth, God Vishnu himself entering her womb.

How the Gospels were created!

Constantine then instructed Eusebius to organize the compilation of a uniform collection of new writings developed from primary aspects of the religious texts submitted at the council.
His instructions were:
"Search ye these books, and whatever is good in them, that retain; but whatsoever is evil, that cast away. What is good in one book, unite ye with that which is good in another book. And whatsoever is thus brought together shall be called The Book of Books . And it shall be the doctrine of my people, which I will recommend unto all nations, that there shall be no more war for religions' sake."
(God's Book of Eskra, op. cit., chapter xlviii, paragraph 31)
"Make them to astonish" said Constantine, and "the books were written accordingly"
(Life of Constantine, vol. iv, pp. 36-39).

Eusebius amalgamated the "legendary tales of all the religious doctrines of the world together as one", using the standard god-myths from the presbyters' manuscripts as his exemplars.
Merging the supernatural "god" stories of Mithra and Krishna with British Culdean beliefs effectively joined the orations of Eastern and Western presbyters together "to form a new universal belief" (ibid.). Constantine believed that the amalgamated collection of myths would unite variant and opposing religious factions under one representative story.
Eusebius then arranged for scribes to produce,
"fifty sumptuous copies ... to be written on parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient portable form, by professional scribes thoroughly accomplished in their art"
(ibid.).

"These orders," said Eusebius, "were followed by the immediate execution of the work itself ... we sent him [Constantine] magnificently and elaborately bound volumes of three-fold and four-fold forms"
(Life of Constantine, vol. iv, p. 36).
They were the "New Testimonies", and this is the first mention (c. 331) of the New Testament in the historical record.
With his instructions fulfilled, Constantine then decreed that the New Testimonies would thereafter be called the " word of the Roman Savior God" (Life of Constantine, vol. iii, p. 29) and official to all presbyters sermonizing in the Roman Empire. He then ordered earlier presbyterial manuscripts and the records of the council "burnt" and declared that "any man found concealing writings should be stricken off from his shoulders" (beheaded) (ibid.). As the record shows, presbyterial writings previous to the Council of Nicaea no longer exist, except for some fragments that have survived.

Some council records also survived, and they provide alarming ramifications for the Church. Some old documents say that the First Council of Nicaea ended in mid-November 326, while others say the struggle to establish a god was so fierce that it extended "for four years and seven months" from its beginning in June 325 ( Secrets of the Christian Fathers , op. cit.). Regardless of when it ended, the savagery and violence it encompassed were concealed under the glossy title " Great and Holy Synod" , assigned to the assembly by the Church in the 18th century.

Earlier Churchmen, however, expressed a different opinion.
The Second Council of Nicaea in 786-87 denounced the First Council of Nicaea as,
"a synod of fools and madmen" and sought to annul "decisions passed by men with troubled brains"
(History of the Christian Church, H. H. Milman, DD, 1871).

If one chooses to read the records of the Second Nicaean Council and notes references to "affrighted bishops" and the "soldiery" needed to "quell proceedings", the "fools and madmen" declaration is surely an example of the pot calling the kettle black.
Constantine died in 337 and his outgrowth of many now-called pagan beliefs into a new religious system brought many converts. Later Church writers made him "the great champion of Christianity" which he gave, "legal status as the religion of the Roman Empire".

(Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire, Matthew Bunson, Facts on File, New York, 1994, p. 86).

Ubenedictus:
this is the question I asked you... stop dodging

you believe the Church continued after the apostles
died and this church isn't the Catholic Church.
please give me a few names of those none Catholic
Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century

This quote written by Tertullian about 75years after the death of Apostle John should tell you the spread of the church of Christ after the Apostles: "For upon whom else have the universal nations believed, but upon the Christ who has already come? For whom have the nations believed- Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and they that inhabit Mesopotamia, Armamia, Phrygia, Cappadocia, and they who dwell in Pontus, and Asia, Pamphylia,...all the limits of of the Spains, the diverse nations of the Gauls, and the haunts of the Britains (inaccessible to the Romans, but subjugated to Christ)... In all which places the name of the Christ who is already come reigns." There're only 2 Churches: Rev. 12:6,14 and Rev.17

Ubenedictus:
this is the question I asked you... stop dodging

you believe the Church continued after the apostles
died and this church isn't the Catholic Church.
please give me a few names of those none Catholic
Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century

...so, as you can see, there are many Churches besides the church of Rome. And even when the Roman Church went on killing spree and persecution of believers who would not agree with their church traditions, the true believers who keep the commandments of God, and the have the testimony of Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:17) scattered all over the face of the earth exist.

Ubenedictus:



it is not a needless distraction.


If you claim the real Church is different from the Catholic Church and exists till our time, then it follows that you should be able to show us these real Christians all through the centuries.


unless you are lying and you have no proof for your claims... which mean you're peddling lies someone told you.

If your definition of the Catholic Church is the Church that preaches Purgatory, infant baptism, oracular confession, image worship, mariology etc, then the early Church and Christians were not 'Catholic' as it is today. If they were Catholics, then the Catholic Church as it is today, has not only backslidden but has gone into apostasy. So the early Christians would not been practising what the present Roman Catholic Church is doing. A right thinking person knows this. The liar is the person who associates Jesus Christ and His early disciples with sinful indulgences, paganism, syncretism, idol worship and false doctrines of the present Roman Catholic Church. He is not just a liar but a blasphemer. I pray you repent. Thanks.

UnchangeableGod:
If your definition of the Catholic Church is the Church that preaches Purgatory, infant baptism, oracular confession, image worship, mariology etc, then the early Church and Christians were not 'Catholic' as it is today. If they were Catholics, then the Catholic Church as it is today, has not only backslidden but has gone into apostasy. So the early Christians would not been practising what the present Roman Catholic Church is doing. A right thinking person knows this. The liar is the person who associates Jesus Christ and His early disciples with sinful indulgences, paganism, syncretism, idol worship and false doctrines of the present Roman Catholic Church. He is not just a liar but a blasphemer. I pray you repent. Thanks.

my dear you still haven't answered the question


you believe the Church continued after the apostles
died and this church isn't the Catholic Church.
please give me a few names of those none Catholic
Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century.



since you believe that the real Christians didn't have those practices, then surely you can name them.

otr1:
...so, as you can see, there are many Churches besides the church of Rome. And even when the Roman Church went on killing spree and persecution of believers who would not agree with their church traditions, the true believers who keep the commandments of God, and the have the testimony of Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:17) scattered all over the face of the earth exist.

give examples of these true believers, is that so hard?

otr1:
This quote written by Tertullian about 75years after the death of Apostle John should tell you the spread of the church of Christ after the Apostles: "For upon whom else have the universal nations believed, but upon the Christ who has already come? For whom have the nations believed- Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and they that inhabit Mesopotamia, Armamia, Phrygia, Cappadocia, and they who dwell in Pontus, and Asia, Pamphylia,...all the limits of of the Spains, the diverse nations of the Gauls, and the haunts of the Britains (inaccessible to the Romans, but subjugated to Christ)... In all which places the name of the Christ who is already come reigns." There're only 2 Churches: Rev. 12:6,14 and Rev.17

of course tertullian bears witness of the spread of the Christian faith but that doesn't answer my question unless of course you consider him to be an example of a real Christian of the 2nd century.

do you consider tertullian to be an example of a real Christian of the 2nd century?

Ubenedictus:
give examples of these true believers, is that so hard?

I'm one of them. Gospel truth has always survived through the ages, and it will, till the end. You asked if there are others churches aside catholic church (if there was anything like it in the first century) after the days of the Apostles, the man I quoted gave you more than a dozen other churches in different places, having nothing to do with the roman church.

Ubenedictus:




my dear you still haven't answered the question


you believe the Church continued after the apostles
died and this church isn't the Catholic Church.
please give me a few names of those none Catholic
Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century.



since you believe that the real Christians didn't have those practices, then surely you can name them.

I don't know their names. Whatever names you reel out depends on the books you read and those who taught you because you and I were not born then. Those authors and your teachers may equally be completely factual or partially factual. Their teachings may also be affected by their own religious biases. I reason along the Scriptures of truth that can never be broken. For you not to agree with me that the Apostles and those early Christians didn't have those practices means you are associating them with the teachings of Purgatory, idol worship, syncretism, interceding through 'Mary' and other departed souls, oescular confessions, forced celibacy, praying for the dead to be forgiven, thereby giving people false assurance that they do not need to repent and be saved while alive (which is akin to sinful indulgence). You are ready to go any length including blaspheming and roping in Christ, His Apostles and the early Church into your unscriptural Roman Catholic practises so as to justify your Church and keep those who you can deceive. However, I am more than convinced that there are people who are wise enough to discern the truth from deception. Thanks.

UnchangeableGod:
For the records, the Apostles of Christ were not 'Catholic Christians' sir. The disciples of Christ were called Christians for being like Christ (Acts 11:19-30). I follow their teachings and examples because they were Christians. If Peter and co were 'Catholic Christians' as you erroneously infer, they would have preached salvation through other names apart from that of Christ (Acts 4:10-12), they would have been bowing to images of 'Mary', they would have preached Purgatory, they would have been paying for indulgences and praying for the dead, they would have asked angels and the dead 'saints' to pray for them, they would have observed oracular confessions, Apostle Peter wouldn't have married, they would have baptized infants etc in the manner of the present day Roman Catholics. Apostle Peter and co did not practice such, so they were not Roman Catholics. They were simply Christians following the footsteps of Christ, Our Saviour and Lord. Thanks.

Did you see apostle Paul? Which church was in existence before the spring of other churches? Why was Catholic church called universal church?

UnchangeableGod:
Philippiansor=Andy2274 post=61857772]. Lol! Expecting to see some scriptural back up as claimed by you. Counselling is telling your spiritual leader your challenges.......you see hypocrisy? "correcting damnable error is part of preaching....which biblical verse and chapter? Mk 16:15..Go into the world and preach the Gospel not correct or judge others. My brother Islam is spreading so fast because they teach their children and young ones what the religion is all about and instill in them their religion but christians rather than preaching the Gospel and teach their children they are busy telling their children the best church, arguing with one another, condemning other people, going after wealth and telling their young ones the church that will go to heaven and hell. Without Holiness no man can see God. Fight for your holiness and salvation and leave other people to do same because on judgment day all man will be on his own. I am not after judging anybody. Judging people means sentencing people to hell fire while they are still alive . Nobody has that right except God. Jesus Christ spoke against the errors and hypocricies of the religious leaders of His day (Matthew7: 23:1-39, Mark 7:6-23, Luke 13:10-17). Paul and other Apostles did same in several of their epistles (Romans 16:17-19; Galatians 1:6-10; 2:4-6,11-14); Philippians 3:17-20 ; Jude 1:4) etc. You are still alive so you can still repent if you choose to. Correcting your errors so that you don't make an everlasting mistake is not judgment (1st Timothy 5:20-22). Mine is borne out of love for you and others like you. Let me tell you this: Christ did not come to establish a religion called Christianity. He came that we might be free from sin and errors. There is no difference between people in the religion you mentioned and those who identify with any Church yet they are in error and idol worship. Both will end in the sane place of they do not repent and walk in the truth. Thank God there is yet chance for you as you are yet breathing. I am not after which Church is the best. I am after you and others knowing the truth which will set you free from sin, errors and eternal damnation. Yes, counselling is perfectly in order - you can approach your mature and experienced spiritual leader who you respect and trust and confide in him/her on certain somewhat personal matters - it could be moral, spiritual, academic, career/ business, relationship, choice, marital, etc for his/her advice and prayers. It does not have to do with confession of sins. It is not mandatory either. The Roman Catholic system of oracular confession to a priest is unscriptural. It is not the same as counselling. God bless you.

. Open your bible and read your bible verse and chapter again and compare.....self acclaimed pastors that doesn't know the bible verse they are reading. Read same matt 7:4-5,.... Because I can't see or compare the bible verses here with the subject matter.

Spylord48:
jealousy na

Fall of my Golden bed laughing You too much The smiley though

Theophinio:
Fall of my Golden bed laughing You too much The smiley though

Golden bed kwa?

UnchangeableGod:
I don't know their names. Whatever names you reel out depends on the books you read and those who taught you because you and I were not born then. Those authors and your teachers may equally be completely factual or partially factual. Their teachings may also be affected by their own religious biases. I reason along the Scriptures of truth that can never be broken. For you not to agree with me that the Apostles and those early Christians didn't have those practices means you are associating them with the teachings of Purgatory, idol worship, syncretism, interceding through 'Mary' and other departed souls, oescular confessions, forced celibacy, praying for the dead to be forgiven, thereby giving people false assurance that they do not need to repent and be saved while alive (which is akin to sinful indulgence). You are ready to go any length including blaspheming and roping in Christ, His Apostles and the early Church into your unscriptural Roman Catholic practises so as to justify your Church and keep those who you can deceive. However, I am more than convinced that there are people who are wise enough to discern the truth from deception. Thanks.

if you don't know names that means you are making an assumption WITHOUT A SINGLE PROOF. It is all hearsay... all lies someone told you.

you can't show a single non Catholic original Christian which tells me your point is incorrect and untrue because the Catholic Church is the original Church and every true Christian from all those centuries are Catholics.

this means your Protestant Church is a 16th century invention, or even a 19century venture created by men who divorced themselves from the historic Christian faith, teaching heresy and twisting scriptures while at the same time condemning the Catholic Church who is the original Christian Church.


and incase you don't know the early church is the Catholic Church.

otr1:
I'm one of them. Gospel truth has always survived through the ages, and it will, till the end. You asked if there are others churches aside catholic church (if there was anything like it in the first century) after the days of the Apostles, the man I quoted gave you more than a dozen other churches in different places, having nothing to do with the roman church.

did you live from the 2nd century to about the 10th century? sorry you are not an early Christian, you are a Protestant, you group began in the 16th century by a ex Catholic priest.


correction

tertullian in case you don't know is a Catholic theologian... he was naming how far the Church had spread in the world...he wasn't talking about a different denomination.

if you want me to show you that he was Catholic just ask.

otr1:
...so, as you can see, there are many Churches besides the church of Rome. And even when the Roman Church went on killing spree and persecution of believers who would not agree with their church traditions, the true believers who keep the commandments of God, and the have the testimony of Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:17) scattered all over the face of the earth exist.

no sir,

there was no other church at the time of tertullian different from the Catholic Church, even tertullian himself was a Catholic.


stop sounding like a conspiracy theorist.

UnchangeableGod:
I don't know their names. Whatever names you reel out depends on the books you read and those who taught you because you and I were not born then. Those authors and your teachers may equally be completely factual or partially factual. Their teachings may also be affected by their own religious biases. I reason along the Scriptures of truth that can never be broken. For you not to agree with me that the Apostles and those early Christians didn't have those practices means you are associating them with the teachings of Purgatory, idol worship, syncretism, interceding through 'Mary' and other departed souls, oescular confessions, forced celibacy, praying for the dead to be forgiven, thereby giving people false assurance that they do not need to repent and be saved while alive (which is akin to sinful indulgence). You are ready to go any length including blaspheming and roping in Christ, His Apostles and the early Church into your unscriptural Roman Catholic practises so as to justify your Church and keep those who you can deceive. However, I am more than convinced that there are people who are wise enough to discern the truth from deception. Thanks.

correction by knowledge about the early church been Catholic has nothing to do with what I was taught....
the early Christian all through the centuries wrote works where they detailed their faith in Christ and the practices they received from the apostles...so I'm not guessing or joking when I say the early Christians were Catholic and the practices in the Catholic Church today is in line with both the early church and what the apostles taught.



again if you disagree all you need to do is show proof of those persons in each century.

UnchangeableGod:
Sir, are you inferring that Ignatius of Anthioch, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus etc taught the doctrine of Purgatory, bowed down to images, interceded through 'Mary' and the dead 'saints', were forced not to marry, baptised infants, observed oracular confessions etc? If so then they were actually as heretical as others you pointed out. The true Christians and Church did not and will not observe such. Thanks.

since you still can't provide your so called underground Church, then maybe it is you who don't known what constitute Christian practices... besides it is your Church that began in the end time.

dingbang:

On what basis will a Church be termed "Non bible Believing"?

Let's have your Opinions ..

This is the easiest question to answer, Sir. Everything about the deep spiritual nature of the Holy Gospels firstly depends on the correct application of the belief and faith of the church leader/disciple/pastor.

A church will be termed "non believing" if the church leader/disciple/pastor can not manifest the evidence of that beliefs in the lives of others.

It is NEVER the fault of the congregation that the Signs and wonders of their beliefs don't manifest because their faith is proved by their willingness to come and pray and worship - that is enough evidence of congregations faith. That is why Jesus trained Disciples/pastors and gave them the spiritual keys to the kingdom of heaven, it was never given to the flock.

If the leader/disciple/pastor can not manifest the evidence of that beliefs in the lives of others, the congregation knows that their pastor is not recognized as a spiritual leader in heaven.

Congregations should study the incredible scientifically verifiable evidence on Emmanuel TV of what a believing church leader/disciple/pastor must do to prove to them that his beliefs is bible based.

Ubenedictus:




my dear you still haven't answered the question

you believe the Church continued after the apostles
died and this church isn't the Catholic Church.
please give me a few names of those none Catholic
Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century.

since you believe that the real Christians didn't have those practices, then surely you can name them.

With all due respect, Sir. The trusting masses are not empowered by smart intelligent sounding historic and philosophical arguments about religion. They honestly desire if their chosen church can manifest the promises of Jesus Christ for their lives.

Jesus Christ did not make empty promises, nor did he encourage historic and philosophical grandstanding to impress suffering mankind.

His eternal promise was, "COME UNTO ME ALL YOU THAT ARE BURDENED, AND I WILL FIX IT."

It is NEVER the fault of the congregation that the Signs and wonders of their beliefs don't manifest because their faith is proved by their willingness to come and pray and worship - that is enough evidence of congregations faith.

That is why Jesus trained Disciples/pastors and gave them the spiritual keys to the kingdom of heaven, it was never given to the flock.

If the leader/disciple/pastor can not manifest the evidence of that beliefs in the lives of others, the congregation knows that their pastor is not recognized as a spiritual leader in heaven.

Congregations should study the incredible scientifically verifiable evidence on Emmanuel TV of what a believing church leader/disciple/pastor must do to prove to them that his beliefs is bible based.

ScienceWatch:
With all due respect, Sir. The trusting masses are not empowered by smart intelligent sounding historic and philosophical arguments about religion. They honestly desire if their chosen church can manifest the promises of Jesus Christ for their lives.

Jesus Christ did not make empty promises, nor did he encourage historic and philosophical grandstanding to impress suffering mankind.

His eternal promise was, "COME UNTO ME ALL YOU THAT ARE BURDENED, AND I WILL FIX IT."

It is NEVER the fault of the congregation that the Signs and wonders of their beliefs don't manifest because their faith is proved by their willingness to come and pray and worship - that is enough evidence of congregations faith.

That is why Jesus trained Disciples/pastors and gave them the spiritual keys to the kingdom of heaven, it was never given to the flock.

If the leader/disciple/pastor can not manifest the evidence of that beliefs in the lives of others, the congregation knows that their pastor is not recognized as a spiritual leader in heaven.

Congregations should study the incredible scientifically verifiable evidence on Emmanuel TV of what a believing church leader/disciple/pastor must do to prove to them that his beliefs is bible based.

yet on the last day many will say, we performed signs in your name and Jesus will reply, I know you not.

internationalman:

is worshipping the mother of Jesus not far acceptable than worshipping d mother of pastor's children and d pastor himself?

Hypocrites everywhere... You will hear them saying daddy daddy.. mummy mummy.. Some would even go as far as cooking and washing for pastors when they don't do the same for their families at home.

no one is better all are wrong praying through Mary is she a messenger? some women respecting their pastor more than their husband is e the one that pay your bride price?

Ubenedictus:


you believe the Church continued after the apostles died and this church isn't the Catholic Church. please give me a few names of those none Catholic Christians from the 2nd century to the 10th century

the church was infiltrated after the death of the apostles.
Roman Catholicism ( cult of Mary) was created to counterfeit Christianity but it failed and will always fail.
There had always been the true church but they are scattered and few. The rise of protestanism was the hand work of God so that gentiles can see the light of christ.
Mr man seek Jesus, start reading the bible and learn to pray to God through Jesus alone. You will know the truth.