₦airaland Forum

PastorAIO:
I was well on my way to my conclusion when you said you had to go and search for the evidence to back what you already made a certain claim of.

At whose request?Meaning you had already made your conclusion!!! Learn to tell the truth!

My conclusions are becoming more entrenched as I see you trying to twist my words.


I hope you know the difference between being an Authority and making Reference to an Authoritative Source.

I said Wikipedia makes references to Authoritative sources. Can you show me, with evidence, where I quoted Wikipedia and what I quoted was false?
This has to be the 3rd or 4th time I'm asking you this.

Indicate the authoritative source referenced by Wiki!

I haven't changed anything. You're the one resorting to dishonesty. i knew you soon start to dance the twist.

This is what I said.

You are speaking of yourself here. After you searched high and low for evidence to back up your prejudices, you didn't find any so you came back to Wikipedia which you had dismissed earlier, but being twisted man, you tried to put it on me that you were quoting wikipedia because I like wikipedia.

This is what happens when you dont painstakingly read through responses and secondary sources and links attached!

I can't not even follow your reasoning in the rest of your response. You're twisting so much that you're no longer even coherent.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im9XuJJXylw

Too bad!

PastorAIO:
So you believe that they are recipients of secret teaching from Jesus. That's good to know.

Talk of twisting!!! show me where I said that! When I said their error was what Paul/John sought to alert the believers of in the mentioned epistles. Anyway quote where I said that!

wow, so you will just dismiss that one without backing up with evidence. Yet Waldensians came directly from the apostles and were limited to one location in europe. and nothing was heard of them till the 12th century.

The Bible is enough evidence Who the Rock was and is and will ever be!

I want to see this scholarly piece o! Until you can demonstrate it let's leave things unconcluded.

Search for, "The Black African Jews" by Dr Fatai Olasupo (featured in The Guardian of Monday February 29).

Not all claims to antiquity are false, but it is a common thing to try to associate with an authority from antiquity in order to get validity. It is safer to be cautious, dubious even, until solid evidence is provided.

Depending on the date in question! If Waldo started the people of the valley movement then common sense is that they should be known for a French and not Latin Bible!

Nope! You'll have to quote out the relevant part from me. Nairaland is a peripheral thing for me in my life, I don't have time to be reading a whole book just to participate in a thread.

That link takes you not to NL but to a page from a book which I dont think can be copied and pasted! So you spew out criticism without reading responses!!!

Proof! That's all we ask for. We know for a fact that Catholic Church did not leave a stone unturned when it came to sniffing out what they considered to be heresies. Look at the Cathars. How could they have escaped notice? Surely the Church would have noticed that there was a corner of Europe that seemed to not be sending money etc.

You say this but ignore links posted!!! How am I sure you read that piece from Wikisource?

You're asking to prove a negative. The question is how come there is no mention of them and you want us to prove that there is no mention of them.

What about Christ's great commission? Did these christians not preach? We know that the Cathars preached and history is full of the details of their beliefs and things they preached. Why not the Waldensians? but after the 12th century they started preaching.

I see, RCC was omniscient! Consider this again:

On this side we have the opinion of many eminent writers on prophecy, who point out the Vaudois church as the Western Witness; and also the unwilling testimony of several Roman Catholic authors, who record the tradition that the "heresy," as they term it, "existed in these valleys from all antiquity."[1] The Vaudois themselves maintained, in all their appeals made at various times to their sovereigns, that the religion they followed had been preserved from father to son, and from generation to generation, "from all time, and from time immemorial."[2] Most of their historians support the same opinion. "The Vaudois of the Alps," writes one of the latest, "are, according to our belief, the primitive Christians,
Wikisource

PastorAIO:
This man, you don't know that I've been trained in the sniffing out of wuruwuru with none less than Olaadegbu himself. Do you think you can twist more than him.? Okay let's go…

Nice to know that you have your conclusions before the discourse could properly commence; tells me you will fight even clear indications that appeal to reason! No problem.

I said I found wikipedia TRUSTWORTHY precisely because it will alert you when it is not on solid authoritative ground.
That doesn't mean that I take wikipedia to be an authority. Transparency does not equal authoritative. I'm sure you're not actually that stupid. You're just trying to twist. Try harder.

Interesting claims those! Now, referring to wikipedia, who said this?

you will show me where I quoted wikipedia where wikipedia didn't make reference to an authoritative source.
I asked you if the part of the wiki page I quoted was wrong, and if so what is your proof of that. I'll repeat my request. Here is the quote:

you said authoritative but you quickly want to change it to trustworthy! Not very honest!

If you have any proof that this is inaccurate, please supply it like a true Scholar not a nut-job.

Once again I'll say that Wikipedia's transparency makes it more trustworthy than your references thus far. That does not make wikipedia an authority.

There we go!

What is your basis for saying this? Again, do you have historical proof or documentation? What is the difference between Waldo and Vaudois? Do they not all mean 'from the valley'? There are certain words that you'll find throughout europe due to their origin in Latin. These include Valley, Vaudois, Valdo, Waldo, Valdez Vaux. Peter Waldo simply means Peter from the valley. Vaudois means People from the valley. So you'll have a hard time to try to cook up a difference between them in the hope of fooling me.

So Peter was born in Lyons, France and had no business initially with Piedmont in Italy where the People of the valley/Vaudois were based! How then is he Peter from the valley? Besides, valley in french does not start with W so Waldo which produced waldenses who merged with the vaudois may not necessarily mean 'of the valley'.

Moreover, the french vaudois simply confirms that the People of the valley based in italy were not very popular since the description by which they are popular-Vaudois is french not latin! This is so because history correctly shows that Waldo brought them to limelight (merging with his own Waldenses) hence being a frenchman, he would have so described them in his mother tongue!

Hahahahah! How silly!! So the only source you could find for your rubbish was wikipedia.

Amazing! You speak from both sides of the mouth!

Okay, two things. First I want to explain why I'm extra cautious with everything you say and then I want to explain wikipedia to you a little bit.

1) I asked you for evidence for what you were saying a while back and this was your response:



YOU ARE STILL SEARCHING KE!!! You are still searching. followed but an excuse to say providing evidence is not possible or 'impracticable' to use your term.

Thankfully early historians agree that of this group not much was known. Besides, that they have a Bible not based on the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and Jerome's vulgate translated in the early centuries show their claims to antiquity as true!

[b]So obviously you arrived a
. Or maybe you've quit searching now and just opted to use wikipedia. (only because you know I respect their records abi )
[/quoted]
Treated,

[quote]2)Okay, wikipedia now. It seems you do not understand how wikipedia works. Any nut-job can write anything on wikipedia, but other interested parties will flag a claim that has no evidence or is just plain nutty. Also wikipages need to be well written. That is where the 'prefatory plead' comes in. I asked a simple question which you failed to answer. What is factually inaccurate about the part of the wikipage that I quoted?

Explained above. Common sense reveals that Waldo could not have found the movement when they already had their latin Bible distinct from Jerome's vulgate meaning they indeed had another source the one translated to latin 157 AD!
Besides, Waldo was a frenchman, not Latin! What then?
If they had depended on Jerome's vulgate and used only french then indeed the matter is settled!

Let's look at the 'prefatory plead'.
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. (February 2016)
The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten. (February 2016)

If a section needs to be rewritten that doesn't mean it is factually inaccurate. It could just be badly written. Wiki explain what it is they want from their lead sections very clearly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section

Having said that that doesn't mean that the only problems that the page will face are problems of style and organisation. Like I said before it is a constant battle to keep nutjobs from contributing to a page. Check this out from the Discussion page of the article:

Didnt you know these before you made your initial claim to authoritativeness?

I'm sure you can immediately recognise this kind of nut job first by the refusal to be bothered to post a source, and secondly by the Catholic baiting that they all seem to have in common.
As the Editor points out these people are relentless and they have to be constantly vigilant.

I'll address the rest of what you said in a subsequent post.

Alright

PastorAIO:
This is a common thing. Too common in fact that it is to be expected. Of course they never have documentation to prove their claims to antiquity.

Other groups that make fantastic claims to antiquity include:

Freemasonry


http://www.gospeltruth.net/1869Freemasonry/freem_chap13.htm

The Alchemists, They claimed that their art goes all the way back to Adam

The Gnostics, They made claims to have the true knowledge of Jesus' teachings going all the way back to Jesus himself.

Not all claims are false. The Gnostics' error and contaminatory activities informed the Epistle to the Colossians and John alluded to them in 1 John 4. The cult had been active around that time. Point? Not all claims to antiquity is false! If others were biased at least I wont expect Voltaire and the unwilling catholic sources to be! (in the wikisource quote)

And of course The Catholic church itself
which also claims the apostolic tradition. A Claim that you would be ever ready to deny them while you support another claim which has less evidence.

That of the catholic church, as regards pope starting from Peter, has feet of clay which even the epistles refute! This will do for another thread.

Igbo people, today in nigeria there are many Igbo people who claim to be descended from Lost Jews.

And there is a scholarly piece in high international demand that affirms this claim as true. (i will give you a reference when I settle)
point? Not all claims to antiquity are false!

Claims of antiquity lend authority to movements especially new movements.

Wikipedia references Samuel Moreland book written in the 17th century based on hearsay and also J. Wiley's History of the Waldenses written in the 19th century.

What these books fail to address is why there is no record of the Catholic church oppressing these Waldensian guy prior to the 12th century.

Did you read that google books link?

It is only in the 12th century the persecutions began. However we know that the catholic church was very vigilant in seeking out heresies and oppressing them. They attacked the Gnostics and the oppression is well documented. They oppressed the Arians too. Church history talks about their attacking one heresy after another. But nothing about attacking Waldensians. not until 12th century. Why?

Did you notice that amplified portion that confirms that they were extant but little known at those times?

What do modern historians have to say about Waldensians and about their histories written by people like Moreland and Wylie?


Light in the Dark Ages, Edman


The problem with their claims is that dates have been altered and lies inserted here and there.

it is up to them or you to prove this too![/quote]

3 And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord?
Numbers 16:3

Was that true? with the mixed multitudes? the continual lusting and murmuring?

That is the antic of false prophets and teachers," every body is holy"! They make us feel anywhere out of Egypt is the promised land (once you are saved you have all God has to give in righteousness and holiness) which of course is not true! But what does Scripture say?

10 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness

6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.


1 Corinth 10:1-6

If salvation cannot be lost and is permanent why would the example of the church in the wilderness be brought to us?

orisa37:
Christianity is a "Mocking" word coined in Antioch for the followers of the man who died on the Cross. There were 12 followers which included Simon Peter, James and John etc. The Bible tells that Christ covenanted to build His Church on "Petros" being Peter in Rome. That Church established by Covenant of Christ was a Universal meaning Catholic Church. After the Spanish Armada, Anglo Saxson opted out of what used to be general catholic church and formed The Anglican Communion. Thus leaving the Balance in Rome as The Roman Catholic Church. In other words, The Roman Catholic, The Anglican, The American Church based on the Pilgrim Progress, The Penticostal Churches etc are all established from Rome and they all use The Septuagint,The Vulgate and The KJV Bible to relate to Christ. IJN AMEN!!!!

Jesus NEVER said HE will be building His Church on Peter else you want to edit this verses:

And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

Ephesians 2:20

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
[/b]1 Corinth 3:11

ifenes:
You cannot know better than the Indians sorry. Your argument is dead.

Your hatred for, and readiness to believe anything that falsely discredits Jesus is pathetic! Now read and learn: He was brought up in Nazareth!

16 So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read.
Luke 4:16

And that is why they could say this about Him:

And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him.

2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?

3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.
Mark 6:1-3

This reveals the lie of those documents! Besides, there was nothing like Isa till Islam came along hence, this is another failed attempt to steal from the truth!

PastorAIO:
Wikipedia has the transparency to notify you when it's facts are disputed. That adds to it's trustworthiness.

What is not factual inside the part that I quoted? I'll repeat it:

The Waldensians (also known variously as Waldenses (/wɔːlˈdɛnsiːz, wɒl-/), Vallenses, Valdesi or Vaudois) are a Christian movement and religious cultural group which appeared first in Lyon and spread to the Cottian Alps in the late 1170s. Today, the Waldensian movement is centered on Piedmont in northern Italy, while small communities are also found in southern Italy, Argentina, Germany, the United States, and Uruguay.

I thought we were talking about reference to authoritative facts? Now that prefatory statement they made already tells you that the article is not authoritative!

I've looked on a Waldensian website (yes, this organisation still exists and unless you want to say you're a member and now it's history more than it's other members …) and this is what they have to say:

History

Founded in the Middle Ages

The Waldensian Church originated with the preaching of the merchant Valdo (Waldo of Lyons, from whom the church’s name originates), 1140-1217. He lived during the same period as Saint Francis of Assisi (1181 or 1182–1226). Like Francis, Waldo also believed in the value of the evangelical poverty of the early church and, after a profound spiritual crisis, gave all his assets to the poor in order to freely preach the gospel.

http://www.waldensian.org/3-history/

These are not some people lost in the mists of history. They still exist. They claim to have started in the 12th century. Just like Wikipedia says.

I wonder, Are you a Waldensian?

Do you know something about waldensians and their history that current members don't know.

The Waldenses (from France started under Peter Waldo) merged with the Valdenses/People of the Valley (in Italy). The former started under Peter Waldo in the 12th century, but not the latter, though history reports a merger of both, it appears they still maintained their identities.

This partial merger explains the dichotomous opinion recorded by Wikisource (I chose this since you respect their records):

There are two strongly contested opinions respecting the antiquity and derivation of this Church in the Wilderness. It is maintained on one side, that she has preserved her apostolic descent, intact and separate, from the earliest age of Christianity to the present time, without any mixture with other churches, and in total exemption from the errors which have clouded the faith of her Christian sisters. On this side we have the opinion of many eminent writers on prophecy, who point out the Vaudois church as the Western Witness; and also the unwilling testimony of several Roman Catholic authors, who record the tradition that the "heresy," as they term it, [size=14pt]"existed in these valleys from all antiquity[/size]."[1] The Vaudois themselves maintained, in all their appeals made at various times to their sovereigns, that the religion they followed had been preserved from father to son, and from generation to generation, "from all time, and from time immemorial."[2] Most of their historians support the same opinion. "The Vaudois of the Alps," writes one of the latest, "are, according to our belief, the primitive Christians,

[27]

and heirs of the primitive Church, preserved in these valleys secure from the alterations introduced successively by the Roman Catholics into the evangelical faith."[3] Beza pronounces them to be "the seed of the pure Christian Church, - being those who have been appointed by the wontlerful providence of God, whom none of the storms by which the world has been shaken, nor persecution, have been able to prevail on to yield a voluntary submission to Roman tyranny and idolatry." An English historian observes, "With the dawn of history we discover some simple Christians in the valleys of the Alps, where they still exist under the ancient name of the Vaudois, who by the light of the New Testament saw the extraordinary contrast between the purity of primitive times and the vices of the gorgeous hierarchy which surrounded them."[4] The late Rev. Dr. Gilly, than whom no one could have a better right to speak on the subject, in his Preface to the former Edition of the present work, observes: "Whether the Protestant inhabitants of the valleys on each side of the Alps, between the great mountain ranges of Mount Cenis and Mount Viso, can be proved by documentary evidence to derive their Christianity from primitive times or not, this is certain, that from very remote periods there has been a Christianity in this region, different from that of Rome, in the dark, mediæval, and modern ages; and this has been handed down to the present era by a succession of martyrs and confessors, and of other faithful men. The faith and discipline of these Alpine Christians may, at times, have been more or less true to the gospel rule; but their creed and church government have always contained articles

[28]

opposed to the pretensions and errors of Rome, as far as we can judge from documents that can be traced up to the fourth century at least. If, therefore, we find truth and evangelical holiness among the Waldenses of Piedmont, when other professors of the gospel in different ages and places went wrong, in the fourth century for example, and again in the ninth and eleventh, in the twelfth and thirteenth, and in the sixteenth century - if we can take epochs at random, and still find vestiges of the pure gospel at the foot of the Cottian Alps, long before the Reformation - we may conclude that the gospel was transmitted, and preserved among them, from primitive times. It is surely more probable that the "men of the valleys," shepherds and husbandmen, should retain the truth, as it was first delivered to them, than that they should be able to discover it amidst the darkness of the twelfth century, when all Christendom was departing farther and farther from the light, under the false teaching of subtle schoolmen, and ambitious and licentious hierarchs.

"At such a remote period did our Piedmontese valleys exhibit the stamp of early evangelization."

We need not multiply authorities, or nothing would be more easy; but we cannot refrain from adding that of one who will not be accused of partiality towards any form of Christianity: "It is an extraordinary fact," observes Voltaire, after affirming the antiquity of the Vaudois Church as the remains of the first Christians of Gaul, "that these men, [size=15pt]almost unknown to the rest of the world[/size], should constantly have persevered, from time immemorial, in usages which have been changed everywhere else."[5]

[29]{speaker here was a neutral atheist, the amplified part further explains why little is said of them! }



We will now say a few words on the opinions of the other party on this contested point, who, whilst bearing an equally favourable testimony to the purity and fidelity of the Vaudois Church, assign her a more recent origin, maintaining that she received both her faith and her appellation from the merchant Reformer of Lyons, Peter Waldo, of whom we shall speak hereafter. They, too, quote from the Roman Catholic writers. Allian de l'Ile, or de Lille, who lived at the end of the twelfth century, speaks of the Vaudois as "wolves in sheep's clothing, called Valdenses, from the name of their leader, Valdus." Pierre de Vaus-Cernay, an author known at the beginning of the thirteenth century, styles them, "the heretics called Valdenses, after the name of one Valdus of Lyons." And a few of the more modern historians take the same side, considering it a sufficient honour for the Vaudois Church "to be descended from a simple layman of Lyons, whose piety, moderation, and courage may serve us for a perpetual example, and to have brought out the truths of the Gospel three ages before the Reformation, as well as to have preserved it since that time amid sufferings and privation."[6] And high praise it un doubtedly is; but we must not therefore omit to state the objections raised against this view of the subject, even by those who equally esteem the intrepid Reformer of Lyons. Again we refer to our opponents - for instance, to the bull of Pope Urban II., which sets forth that the Vaudois had been "infected with heresy from the year 1096," long before the birth of Peter Waldo. We may also again quote the assertion of Pierre de Vaus-Cernay, who in his laudatory history of Simon de Montfort, observes, that "this great Defender of the Faith especially signalized himself in his extermination

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Waldensian_Church_in_the_valleys_of_Piedmont/Chapter_I

Now note that the reference to 12th century and is where Peter Waldo of Lyons come up.

[email]This appears to support the growing Chrislam movement and also lend some credence to the conspiracy theories on similar topics.[/email]


According to paragraph 841 of the Catholic Profession of Faith:

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm

This is in direct contradiction of the Bible's position that:

23 Whoever denies and repudiates the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses and acknowledges the Son has the Father also:
1 John 2:23 AMP

The time will come when those who hold to this verse may be martyred or jailed for intolerance!

As per the topic of the Thread, I think Roman Catholicism leans more in the direction of Islam considering their Catechism 841:

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p3.htm

This is in direct contradiction of the Bible's position that:

23 Whoever denies and repudiates the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses and acknowledges the Son has the Father also:
1 John 2:23

PastorAIO:
you will show me where I quoted wikipedia where wikipedia didn't make reference to an authoritative source.

See below and kindly highlight an authoritative source therein!

PastorAIO:

The Waldensians (also known variously as Waldenses (/wɔːlˈdɛnsiːz, wɒl-/), Vallenses, Valdesi or Vaudois) are a Christian movement and religious cultural group which appeared first in Lyon and spread to the Cottian Alps in the late 1170s. Today, the Waldensian movement is centered on Piedmont in northern Italy, while small communities are also found in southern Italy, Argentina, Germany, the United States, and Uruguay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldensians
Personally I didn't know that the bible was written in the 12th century.

I wonder what is authoritative about a website making this prefatory plead:


[hide]This article has multiple issues. [size=14pt]Please help improve it[/size] or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. (February 2016)
The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten. (February 2016)
-Wikipedia

Tertullian will make reference to the trinity because the concept of the trinity was already being discussed in christianity in his time. At the council of Nicea it is also referenced, without mentioning 1John 5:7.
There were many theological concept discussed in christianity in that era that had no biblical source. For instance the divinity or christ, the humanity of christ, the relationship between the divinity and humanity of christ etc etc etc.

Cyprian around 250AD, just like Tertullian, made his quote of that passage from the Bible, prefixing it with the phrase,"it is written"! Considering the fact that the first Nicea council was held more than a century after Cyprian,it is clear that there was that had the Bible and already established firm belief in its teaching being not under the RCC or her council established doctrines.

Do you have any documents references the Vaudois in the 2nd century?

I am still searching. The accounts given by various, trustworthy sites viz a viz the obvious attesting testimony of history and reality were the sources. The Vaudois were known by many names , some derogatory, (Vallenses,People of the Valley etc) hence requesting a document that references that name is impracticable!

See this from a historian:

https://books.google.com.ng/books?id=5utTAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA247&lpg=PA247&dq=proof+of+the+existence+of+the+vaudois+in+2nd+century&source=bl&ots=LeG2ZLQmg_&sig=u_ZsGqBUpY6CVztSyCTmQAeM_Ek&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj74OPv167LAhWCWBoKHTIfBHcQ6AEIHzAB#v=onepage&q=proof%20of%20the%20existence%20of%20the%20vaudois%20in%202nd%20century&f=false

And this from an Author's defense(no time for games or errors here):
http://www.sdadefend.com/Living-Word/Answers2Objections/Answers2-3.htm

Meanwhile you do this:
Leave out wikipedia and prove using authentic sources that Peter Waldo was the founder of the Vaudois/People of the valley and that there was nothing like that before the 12th century bearing in mind that Lyons (France) is not the Piedmont valley(Italy, original base of the People of the Valley/Vallenses)!

ifenes:
The church lied.

The author of the failed gospel lied!


So the Gospel of Barnabas incontrovertibly contradicts the Qur’an when it declares that Muhammad was to be the Messiah. No Muslim can be true to his own holy book while at the same time trying to defend the Gospel of Barnabas as an authentic Gospel.

O Mary! Lo! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, illustrious in the world and the hereafter. Surah 3.45

What is very interesting here is the discovery that this Gospel not only contradicts the Qur’an but also itself. In the prologue to the book it speaks of "Jesus the Nazarene, called Christ" and states that it is the "true Gospel of Jesus, called Christ". [size=15pt]The author does not seem to have been aware that Messiah and Christ are interchangeable terms, meaning the same thing[/size]. The latter derives from the Greek word Christos which is a translation of the original Hebrew word Mashiah.


We know the Truth sire!

You are all cordially invited to the few days remembrance ceremony of the failed 'gospel of barnabas' that passed on tragically under the hammer of Truth. Just follow this link:
https://www.nairaland.com/2912069/gospel-barnabas-laid-rest

.

PastorAIO:
That is not evidence of anything. What you will do is show a document making reference to Vaudois in the 2nd century A.D.

If you can't do this then get ready to be dismissed as a pseudo-scholar nut job.

Interesting! You willingly accept wikipedia's position sans such evidence and on seeing a superior account suddenly request for a document of someone referring to the Vaudois in 2AD!

The evidence i have is tied on 1John 5:7 quoted by Tertullian (155-220AD) which at that time was only found in the Vaudois Bible then.
http://greggfetter..in/2013/07/is-there-perfect-bible-is-bible-inerrant.html

http://remnant-online.com/smf/index.php?topic=783.335;wap2

If you would counter this then give your proof of the source of Tertullian's reference to 1 John 5:7 and that there was a RCC bible that could have furnished Tertullian with that verse

PastorAIO:

The Waldensians (also known variously as Waldenses (/wɔːlˈdɛnsiːz, wɒl-/), Vallenses, Valdesi or Vaudois) are a Christian movement and religious cultural group which appeared first in Lyon and spread to the Cottian Alps in the late 1170s.

There is an error here! Waldo popularized the Vallenses/vaudois but he was not the founder of the movement!
See:
http://2x2friendsworkers.proboards.com/thread/15/peter-waldo-1170-founder-vaudois

Today, the Waldensian movement is centered on Piedmont in northern Italy, while small communities are also found in southern Italy, Argentina, Germany, the United States, and Uruguay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldensians

Personally I didn't know that the bible was written in the 12th century.

No it wasnt.
Also see https://www.nairaland.com/2937501/1-john-5-7-real

PastorAIO:
But you too came with opinion on the Waldensinians nah?

Make sure you provide as much evidence as you demand of Ifeness for your claim that Waldensianians created the bible.

I did not say that highlighted!


For further understanding of the post you quooted
Check the link here:

Scholar8200:
Go to http://www.fellowshipofthemartyrs.com/articles/44-about-the-church/97-waldensians-the-true-history-of-the-christian-church-

For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

Titus 2:11,12

If the grace you claim to have received does not do so in your life, you have been deceived!

For there are certain men crept in unawares,..., ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
Jude 1:4

Plans to introduce a new tax on communication services underway

A new Bill to impose a Communication Service Tax (CST) is being introduced by the National Assembly. The CST will be levied on service fees payable by users of electronic communication services at 9% and will be borne by the customers. If the Bill is enacted into law, it will mandate service providers to file monthly tax returns with the FIRS with strict penalties for non-compliance.

The categories of communication services liable to the tax include voice calls, SMS, MMS, Data and Pay TV.

http://pwcnigeria.typepad.com/files/pwc-tax-alert_communication-service-tax.pdf

And that Barnabas name was always Joses; he only became Barnabas after Jesus had ascended to Heaven being so named by the Apostles meaning he was not one of the 12:

36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,
Acts 4:36

Papist:
Did you go to school at all? So your source of history is a propaganda website called chick.com?

your opinion, light years from reality. Go to http://www.fellowshipofthemartyrs.com/articles/44-about-the-church/97-waldensians-the-true-history-of-the-christian-church-

CoolUsername:
The books not being chronologically arranged is one thing. But not within the same chapter of a book. As a matter of fact, these verses that you posted don't show anything.

No problem.

CoolUsername:
So God didn't actually mean it? I wonder what other commandments served this purpose. I can now see why Christians cherry-pick only the verses they like in the Bible.

So where did I say God didnt mean it? The accusation of cherry picking is understandable; you dont understand these things as clarified in the NT, and since you are an atheist, no need to waste time explaining. (I dont expect you to )

ishaqteejay:
okay let us do it this way
sack farming materials and cost analysis

---

1. sack =#80 per dozen
2. soil(black soil,cow dump,top soil)@ ratio 3:1:1 price and quantity may varues,so no price,
3. seed =any high yielding hybrid variety is highly recommended = #4900 -#6500 depending on the state, company etc
4. fertilizer = apply every 5 days or 1 week. or check fertilizer application for a particular plant and the type of fertilizer needed for the plant.=#5000(npk 15:15:15 25kg)
5. pesticide= fighter 32 ec is good for killing pest, check for the types of plant to apply to and check manuals on how to apply. =#900(500ml)

*The sack should be fill half with the soil mixture
* 1 to 2 table spoon of npk
*sack should washed properly
*proper row spacing should be done
*string your cukes early with strong wood and ropes

---

please it is always good to follow the thread well before asking questions to avoid asking answered or similar questions, will add more later if i miss some points.thanks

Thanks a lot.

DoctorAlien:
LOL. Why is this question hard for you to answer? Why do you want me to provide a Bible verse? For all your knowledge of the Bible and its teachings, haven't you the slightest of ideas whether Jesus Christ obeyed the 10 Commandments when He was on earth?

I still ask you: Did Jesus Christ obey the 10 Commandments of GOD when He was on earth? Yes or No?

That is because I can only say what the bible says viz Jesus came to fulfil the Law and Prophets, no more, no less!

Now why were the pharisees always at loggerheads with Him as regards the sabbath?

Why did Jesus call Himself the Lord of the sabbath?

ifenes:
@Scholar8200 Note; Aquarius is called the Sign of the Water Bearer, or the man with a jug of water on his shoulder mentioned in the New Testament.

Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.

2 Timothy 3:8,9

ifenes:
second time you failed to explain,student of the bible indeed

I will use a better translation ; Luke 22:11 and say to the owner of the house, 'The Teacher asks: Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?'


Note the use of the word "Teacher". Pisces are said to make good teachers. And his disciples, here a symbol of a "Take Over",change of regime.

The Indians have their zodiac symbols and stories wrapped around it,so do the Chinese,Egyptians and African. The Vatican only did the same with the Bible. None of the characters are real.

Moses was an early Biblical Hebrew religious leader, lawgiver, prophet, and military leader, condemns his own people upon finding them worshiping a 'golden calf' (a symbol of the previous Age of Taurus and of the worship of the bull deity) after coming down Mount Sinai. This is why jews blow the ram's horn. Mithra(changed to Moses) in his own story kills the bull as well. "


If we want to talk about ancient Pagan traditions no fully inserted into the Bible like The Age of Capricorn,in which the winter solstice theoretically takes place. A time when the Sun God is least powerful.

During the Age of Pisces, the Fish was the symbol of divinity and the Sun God fed the multitude with two small fishes...hmmm Jesus


I could go on and on..... The Catholic only tried coping Paganism into today's Bible,from which christianity was born to cover it up.

The catholic did not produce the Bible. There were Christians long before the RCC.

ifenes:
What does this verse you read mean?

Just what it says!

ifenes:
I'm waiting! Explain Luke 22:11

And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?Luke 22:11

What questions do you have on something so plain?

ifenes:
When I asked you to explain Matthew 28:20,You couldn't! Now you suddenly are trying to be defensive.

You were asked to present your question and next was everything but a question!

ifenes:
"They said to Him, "Where do You want us to prepare it?" 10And He said to them, "When you have entered the city, a man will meet you carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house that he enters. 11"And you shall say to the owner of the house, 'The Teacher says to you, "Where is the guest room in which I may eat the Passover with My disciples?"'…



Luke 22:10 refers to the usher of Aquarius, or the water barer, when the Sun leaves Jesus, or the house of Pisces, and goes into the house of Aquarius.

I guess he also served his own supper and that in the same place mentioned