₦airaland Forum

flourishG: you know d problem with you?PRIDE!and nobody wants to listen to others n learn.first,as shdemidemi said, does that mean others can not understand more that we now hv the complete scriptures.at the time peter made da above statement,it was still a progressive revelation of God so it might be hard(some things though, not all as in all scriptures).nothing is hard to understand now that we hv da complete revelation n information in scriptures.that's how u half baked people go about spreading half truth n say u know something.when i say something now u will say am insulting u.the fact is,it is the truth that hits u not me insulting u.

Thank you.I quoted scripture where it is said that certain things are difficult to understand,You instead,call me Proud and half baked. You rather prefer to post your own opinion that "nothing is hard to understand as we now have complete revelation and information in scripture", which is completely non-scriptural. I have complained before of your unprovoked insults. Indeed you are a good example of the kind of Christians your private interpretations produce.

JesusisLord85: You and shdemidemi are preaching different messages, so please tell me how you are holding hands.

I take my seat beside this "questioner". Waiting patiently for answers.

shdemidemi: Is Peter the foundation?

Its like saying "Is peter the Shepherd of the flock"?. Christ has the eternal claim to both titles, but he clearly made peter his visible representative in both titles when :
(a) He called Simon,kephas/Peter/Rock on whom His church will be built and gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom(Matt 16:18-19).
(b) Where He told Peter to "Feed my Lamb" and "feed my Sheep" (Jn21:15-17).
This Christianity is about 2000yrs old, so it has its history which part of it is contained in the scriptures. Let me show you something you don't know.


A very very long time ago your question was answered, see the following.

The Letter of Clement to James

"Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter" (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221])
N.B Clement was the Bishop of Rome at this time.


The Clementine Homilies

"[Simon Peter said to Simon Magus in Rome:] ‘For you now stand in direct opposition to me, who am a firm rock, the foundation of the Church’ [Matt. 16:18]" (Clementine Homilies 17:19 [A.D. 221]).

N.B Peter himself understood it so.


Jerome

"‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division" (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).

"I follow no leader but Christ and join in communion with none but your blessedness [Pope Damasus I], that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that this is the rock on which the Church has been built. Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails" (Letters 15:2 [A.D. 396]).

N.B This Man's work made possible the present bible. There are many more.

.

shdemidemi: Are you hiding something, you keep skipping verse 21 where it says

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.



I Corinthians 3:16

"Know ye not (we're expected to know) that ye are the temple (or dwelling place) of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" On what foundation? On the foundation that Christ is the son of God.

Which part of my submission are you now disputing with the addition of verse 22? for you neither quoted verse 21 yourself.

shdemidemi: Seemed to be pillars---- did you see seemed there

They seem to be, does that say they are actually pillars?

Who is the rock indeed?

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11)

Peter himself gives the answer as to who the Rock is. He says Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). Again, speaking of Christ, he says: "This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders" (Acts 4:10-11); so Christ, the Son of God, must be the rock on which God built His church.

Jesus is the rock indeed.The eternal Shepherd. Yet He made sure He gave us the assurance of not falling into this chaos we have today in the name of Christianity when He called Simon,the rock. He told us who to listen to when He made Peter the Shepherd. And Paul acknowledged this in (Eph2:19-20) 19 "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets,Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

bishopjoe02: u jst gave me insight nto d verse, i neva new wat dat verse was saying until today

Hahaha,you've found a window to escape the truth, yeah it makes great sense to you.

italo: So Paul was the guide to Timothy then, not scripture. Why didnt Paul tell Timothy to teach what is in scripture?

See how you contradict your own false doctrine.

No be small thing o.

shdemidemi: 2 Timothy 3:16

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

That tells me I need the scriptures as a guide.

Can you answer my question now, what is your guide?

I took my time to go through all the available versions of the bible, Yet I didn't see any one with "Only Scripture..." as against "All scripture...". That means you can use all but it never said only.

Now here is mine again.

Syncan: Indeed we have a guide but not for "anyone that says", There is a guide for everyone that submits to the guidance of the guide. There is just "one fold and one shepherd"(Jn10:16). One church built upon Peter Matt (16:18), and the rest of the apostles as foundation (Eph 2:19-21). One church which is the "Pillar and foundation of truth" (1Tim3:15). Commissioned to "spread the good news and make disciples of all nations" (Matt28:19). One church who despite having circumcision "written" in scriptures as a prerequisite for "God's sonship", declared that it has pleased the Holy Spirit to reveal that it no longer is(Acts 15). The same church that stood against Arius and proclaimed the doctrine of the Trinity(325AD). The same church that approved these books in the bible as cannon while rejecting others(393AD,397AD,1546AD),the same church that, barely thirty years after declaring the first cannon in 393AD, had to stand against Nestorius and declared Mary,"the mother of God (Theotokus)" (431AD). The same church that stood against Martin Luther and declared "sola fidei and sola scriptura" false teachings (1546AD). That same church is still the guide,for "the gates of hell shall never overcome" her.

shdemidemi: I did not say that , this is what Christ said "Thou art Petros, and upon this petra I will build My church.”

Paul tells us that the petra is Christ. He also says, “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11).

Peter is never designated by petra. Peter accepts Christ is the rock , Paul did likewise.

I feel like screaming Heresy! Heresy! Heresy!

1.Christ spoke Aramaic and he said "thou art kepha, and upon this kepha I will build my church", he didn't speak greek as you portray.

2.Here is one of your most favorite quotes, why do you forget so quickly? (Gal 2:7-9)
"But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles
2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

3. Again to Peter Jesus transferred the title of shepherding His flock when He told Peter to " Feed my lamb" and "Feed my Sheep" (Jn 21:15-17)

shdemidemi: What is your question?

Here it is again

Syncan: Please tell me where you got that the "book is your guide"

shdemidemi: Peter [petros, means little rock], and upon this rock [petra, means very great rock, referring to Christ Himself] I [pointing to Himself] will build My church”

Check that bro

Please listen to yourself. "Peter is Christ" that's what you are saying?

shdemidemi: I asked you questions on that same thread pending answers. The question here is quite direct thus a direct answer would be adequate. What is our guide as believers?

I am sure I answered your questions in that thread.If you answer mine here(which came first), I will answer yours again.

shdemidemi: You are getting the whole thing wrong. What do you understand by the body of Christ?

When Christ says 'upon this rock I will build my church', was He referring to Peter or the answer Peter gave which was 'Christ is the son of God'?

Really? I am getting it wrong eh? Are you aware that his name was Simon? That Jesus named him Cephas/Peter/Rock (on which He built His church)? A name which he continued using from then on till today? hehehe, someone is really getting things wrong here.

shdemidemi: I assumed you meant what I said from your initial post..I am sorry about that.

What is our guide as believers?

I believe I answered your question in the link bellow, but you my friend have not told me what inspired your use of "the book" as your guide.

https://www.nairaland.com/1342459/why-pentecostals-reject-catholic-baptism/2#16613742

shdemidemi: We are likely not on the same page then, what is our guide as believers then?

Do not evade the question,Please tell me where you got that "the book is your guide", or is it just a personal thought without support?

shdemidemi: Excellent..we both agree that there is a guide and the guide is the book. If you agree with this, we are saying the same thing.

Please tell me where you got the bolded from

shdemidemi: ^^^ what are you insinuating, Peter said some things Paul taught were hard to understand. Does that in anyway say individuals cannot understand them if they study?

First, I used that scripture to correct an erroneous claim as highlighted. Now to your question, you may read and understand only if your understanding is inline with the teachings of the "guide". For if you teach something different from what has "pleased the Holy Spirit and us" (Acts 15:28)to reveal, then you are doing that "unto your own destruction". And you will be anathema.Do not forget that you are in 2013, reading and inferring meaning to a religious teaching that 2000yrs old. More so you are old enough to see the chaos private interpretation has caused, do not turn a blind eye to obvious truth.

shdemidemi: Do we not have a guide that unites anyone that says he is part of the church?

Indeed we have a guide but not for "anyone that says", There is a guide for everyone that submits to the guidance of the guide. There is just "one fold and one shepherd"(Jn10:16). One church built upon Peter Matt (16:18), and the rest of the apostles as foundation (Eph 2:19-21). One church which is the "Pillar and foundation of truth" (1Tim3:15). Commissioned to "spread the good news and make disciples of all nations" (Matt28:19). One church who despite having circumcision "written" in scriptures as a prerequisite for "God's sonship", declared that it has pleased the Holy Spirit to reveal that it no longer is(Acts 15). The same church that stood against Arius and proclaimed the doctrine of the Trinity(325AD). The same church that approved these books in the bible as cannon while rejecting others(393AD,397AD,1546AD),the same church that, barely thirty years after declaring the first cannon in 393AD, had to stand against Nestorius and declared Mary,"the mother of God (Theotokus)" (431AD). The same church that stood against Martin Luther and declared "sola fidei and sola scriptura" false teachings (1546AD). That same church is still the guide,for "the gates of hell shall never overcome" her.

mamsong9: Reveal to who? You people like making something out of nothing. God wul rather keep it to Himself than to reveal it to gays.

Yeah, gays whose stand against abortion stopped your mum from flushing you down the drain? Whose works have saved millions of humans discriminated against and abandoned by your ilk from death? gays who gave their lives to save others in the face of injustice?
I guess the apostles were all thieves because Judas stole, yet the Lord revealed hidden truths to them. Well,HE does that, you can take up the fight with HIM.

flourishG: that's wrong of u.scriptures don't speak in tongues but in clear n understandable languages.what it says is what is meant.

Compare the above with this part from scripture and see how wrong you are:

"As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction"2Pet3:16

I guess you kept mute after my earlier response, following your rudeness, because you had nothing to say. I accept the silent apology anyway.

bishopjoe02: i guess such council stil exit, ie CAN, bt i dont knw hw effective they r.
Paul and Banarbas have issues n choosing companiön nt faith anyway.

CAN? l nearly dropped off my seat with laughter. Such council must have: 1. a universal appeal. 2. An appostolic succession( should be able to trace its authority to the apostles). 3. One Faith and one baptism professed. 4.Must have holiness as its means and aim. If any of these were lacking in the council that approved the bible in the 4th century,it would not have been what it is today to you..."The Scripture".

flourishG: I asked u a question n some else answered.is dat also your own answer to da question or u can't think for yourself?

And I thought this was a public forum. My post was for some else, but you responded to it by asking me a question based on it. Now, someone else responded to your question to me, which I was courteous enough to affirm. Yet you come up with insult.

bishopjoe02: even apostle paul and the 12 disciple have their differences, 1st n d aspect of eating nd associating wth d gentile, paul even have to rebuke peter publicly cos he was ashame to identify wth d gentile cos d Jews was there. Even n d baptism of d gentiles they av their diffs, try nd read d bk of act again.
Paul and barnabas who was choosing to preach d gospel to d gentile have their diffs 2 thats y dey separatd.

Did you read my post at all? Did i tell you what they do when they are in conflict? Your post suggests that everyone stick to his gun and that my dear is wrong. Acts 15 made it clears that a resolution was reached at the council which favors St. Paul's own view on the matter. So if St. Paul stands on that premise to rebuke Peter, then he is right to insist that Peter stands by the council's declaration. However if the altercation with Peter was before the Council then he was only expressing his on view which was eventually declared correct by the council. Note that it is easier for Paul to err than the council to err, believe me, if that council had proclaimed Paul wrong, you would not have seen those writings of Paul with respect to this opinion of his in the bible today. Its either he may not have written them, or it would have been truncated as not inspired of God. So that council in Acts 15 gave confirmation to what Paul preaches as correct. On Barnabas and Paul, you are yet to tell me that their differences was on issue of Faith.

bishopjoe02: i dont knw were u r getting ur idea frm, apart frm pugatory and mary there is no oda diff btw d catholic nd pentecostal, just as apostle paul was called to preach d gospel to gentile dat hw HE have raise diff men to spread d gospel 2

St.Paul propagated the good news in line with what the apostles teach, it is expected that at the time, that not every thing will be clear to them all, yet when they had a conflict of opinion, they came together in a council (Acts 15). Even St. Paul Identified the apostles as the "foundation" of where he belongs (Eph.2:19-21). Even he had to go back to verify what he is teaching, lest he runs in vain (Gal.2:2). When did your "preacher" start his own and who does he go to for verification,"lest he runs in vain"?

flourishG: what's private interpretation?

italo: Each individual or group interpreting scripture the way they like.

What do you think about it?

I guess you already got your answer here

tobechi74: Nigerian blessed michael tancy has been pending since over 15years while popo john who died few years ago is already a saint...........


At times i doubt if politics is involved in this





(by d way am a catholic)

It all depends on how quick God reveals it, some aspect of the sainthood process depends on Man,this entails investigation into the life of the individual. Some other aspects depend on God, this entails his manifestation of this via verifiable miraculous events associated with the saint or through the intercession of the Saint. St Anthony of Padua was made a saint just 352 days after his death. You may want read about this saint.

shdemidemi: 1 Timothy 4
King James Version (KJV)
4 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.



10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Also note:"For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others--and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it" Matt 19:12.

That was "Jesus Gospel"

Now what about St. Pauls Gospel:

"I wish all of you were like me. But you each have your own gift from God. One has this gift. Another has that.
8 I speak to those who are not married. I also speak to widows. It is good for you to stay single like me. 9 But if you can’t control yourselves, you should get married. It is better to get married than to burn with sexual longing".

shdemidemi: It does not matter, it is not about you or me or the guy that I created the thread for but about the true word of God. We are all different people with opinions, the scripture should unite us not divide us.

Exactly why private interpretation is wrong. From all indication, the above is not happening. Yet there was a time when it was. When the Church was on top of things, giving interpretations to the word of God and mysteries revealed by the Holy spirit as promised.A time when every one respected the decision of the "elders" in council.

Dearest brethren reading this thread,I need your help, please kindly go through my posts above and take note of my questions to Shdemidemi. I need someone to translate his answers to something simpler to understand pleeeaaase!

@Onyfrank
My dear, God has given you the priviledge of being educated, so study. Just the mere reading through this thread shows you the immense contradictions propagated by these various institutions yet claiming to be led by the Holy Spirit. Your baptism is authentic and its tradition outdates the very origin of these institutions rejecting it. It is professed by those who approved the bible as inspired word of God in the 4th century, they at least, we are sure were led by the Holy Spirit. Please flee from such gathering and forget such helps with conditions attached, it is not from God.

shdemidemi: I believe you are very good at unedifying disputes. The syncan guy said, I am trying to show off by luring you into the study of romans cos you are unprepared for it. But, he has shown he isn't being neutral cos you call me names and call the gospel I propagate poison even while you are unprepared for a dual study.

You said you want to do Romans and you have done Galatians. I wonder who made you an authority in these things, you said you are unprepared for a joint study but you are ready to do a summary from your own view point.

My bad then if you felt wronged. Why not take it that, probably, I love you more. That won't be wrong now, would it?

shdemidemi: Rephrase your question

"So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the [a] saints, and are of God’s household, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy [b] temple in the Lord,"

Paul called these gentiles citizens. I ask, of which kingdom, heaven or God's.