₦airaland Forum

chukwudi44:
"it is plain that the apostles did not pass everything unto us through their letters,many things have come to us orally.Hence let us look to the tradition of the church as the subject of our belief.when such and such a doctrine is tradition,look no further"-st John chrysostom(345-407AD)


"let us suppose that the apostles had left us no hidden records.Would we not have been able to follow the precepts of tradition that they handed down to those to whom they entrusted the churches?"-st irenaeus(AD 175)

st John chrysostom was the best bible teacher of his generation.
st irenaeus was a disciple of polycarp of smyrna ,who was personally baptised by apostle John

Confused men;the both of them.

So based on what/whose standards was st. John Chrysostom the best bible teacher of his generation?Catholic standards or probably the general populace who were under the influence of catholic teachings?

Being the best bible teacher does not guarantee that you teach the truth because that grading;best,could be based on false and irregular standards.

So does the fact that st Irenaeus being a disciple of polycarp of smyrna,who was personally baptised by apostle John,guarantee that his teachings are infallible?
Look at what you base ur convictions on!! Pathetic!!!

What happened to the church left by the apostles?

Nothing happened to the Church except that it almost was pushed ino non existence by the swarming of false faiths.

what year were they obliterated and by whom?

See the reply above.They were not obliterated but rather pushed into the backgrounds by the roman catholics.

When did the roman Catholics take over and who was the first pope?

The roman Catholics took over sometime after the establishment of the gospel and the church;based on the swarming of their false doctrine.Their first Pope? It certainly wasn't Peter.

Remember Jesus said ''the gates of hell shall NEVER prevail against it(his church)''

so how come the early church were obliterated by the roman catholics or is Jesus telling a lie?

See my previous answer where I said, the church was never obliterated,only pushed into the background.Do you know what  to prevail in that context  means?It means to win or overcome totally,completely; not partially or partly.
Jesus Christ did not lie.He said the gates of hell will not prevail against his church.That can be seen in the fact that the church;though beat down into almost non existence in the past, is still in existence more today and will continue to exist.
It is also interesting to note that Christ said that in the last days,many will depart from the faith;meaning that it would only be a few that would be left to be called the church.Not the many who seem to think that they are the church.

As i said before,ur questions are based on the assumption that the roman catholic church is the church.I said that it is still in debate(although it is already a settled matter for some of us what the church was and still is) therefore,ur questions don't hold water.

But at least I've provided some reasonable answers for u.

Is written scripture superior to oral scripture?

Written scripture and oral scripture are compatible and are in agreement with each other.They are just two different forms of passing across the same message;not contradictory,different or alien messages.

should we ignore divine revelations because there are not in the bible ?

We ignore revelations when they do not agree or are not compatible with Scripture/the bible.

we know that the bible only told us that God created heaven and earth and made no mention of mercury,mars and other planets ,does it mean they don't exist?

Psalm 8:3(KJV)
(3)  When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

Psalm 8:3(CEV)
(3)  I often think of the heavens your hands have made, and of the moon and stars you put in place.

Sorry,the bible does mention the planets and other heavenly and celestial bodies.So,we know they exist based on the bible and based on physical evidence too.

N/B: Heavens- shaw-mah'-yim, shaw-meh'
The second form being dual of an unused singular; from an unused root meaning to be lofty; the sky (as aloft; the dual perhaps alluding to the visible arch in which the clouds move, as well as to the higher ether where the celestial bodies revolve): - air, X astrologer, heaven (-s).
(Strong's bible dictionary)

chukwudi44:
Please those of you criticizing the catholic church ,I have few questions for you,

What happened to the church left by the apostles?

what year were they obliterated and by whom?

When did the roman Catholics take over and who was he first pope?

Remember Jesus said ''the gates of hell shall NEVER prevail against it(his church)''

so how come the early church were obliterated by the roman catholics or is Jesus telling a lie?

Chukwudi,

U're asking these questions based on the assumption that the church the apostles established and left was the Catholic church.That is still in debate, so ur questions don't hold water.

The church the apostles left was that fashioned after the bible's accounts, not that as portrayed by the Catholics.Peter was never a pope.Roman Catholicism came about as a result of steady deviation from the faith by some set of people with their own convictions about the word of God.

Below is another belief of the Catholics:

" It is said: And the Virgin's name was Mary. Let us speak a little about this name which means: star of the sea and which befits admirably the Virgin Mary. Therefore she really is this noble star born of Jacob whose beams enlighten the whole world. If the winds of temptations arise, if you run into the rocks of tribulations, look at the star, invoke Mary. If you are tossed about by the waves of pride, ambition, betrayal and jealousy, look at the star, invoke Mary.If anger or avarice or the seductions of the flesh shake the little boat of your soul, look at Mary. If, troubled by the enormity of your crimes, confounded by the uncleanliness of your conscience, frozen with fright at the thought of judgment, you start to be swallowed up by the gulf of sadness and the abyss of despair, think about Mary.
In perils, in anguish, in doubt, think about Mary, invoke Mary.May she not depart from your mouth, may she not depart from your heart and, to obtain the succor of the prayer, do not neglect the example of her life.
If you follow her, you do not go astray.
If you pray to her, you do not despair.
If you consult her, you are not wrong.
If she supports you, you do not fall.
If she protects you, you fear nothing.
If she leads you, you do not tire.
If she is favorable to you, you reach your aim.
And thus you experience on your own with what reason it has been said:
And the Virgin's name was Mary."
(Saint Bernard, The name of Mary)

See how they took what was ascribed to Jesus alone and placed it on Mary.The prophesy of Balaam spoke about Christ;the star  out of Jacob was in reference to Christ and not Mary.

Numbers 24:17-19
(17)  I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.
(18)  And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also shall be a possession for his enemies; and Israel shall do valiantly.
(19)  Out of Jacob shall come he that shall have dominion, and shall destroy him that remaineth of the city.

“If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA” (Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12).

“If anyone says that the sacraments of the new law are NOT  NECESSARY FOR SALVATION ,  but that without them ,  men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification ,  LET HIM BE ANATHEMA” (Trent, 7th ses., Canon 4)

“If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification let him be anathema” (Council of Trent)

These above also contradict the bible.
Compare with:

Romans 4:5(KJV)
(5)  But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Romans 4:5(ISV)
(5)  However, to someone who does not work, but simply believes in the one who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.

Romans 4:5(CEV)
(5)  But you cannot make God accept you because of something you do. God accepts sinners only because they have faith in him.


More contradiction:

“If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of Justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema” (The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Session 6, Canon 30. Shroeder, H.J., Tan Books, 1978, p. 46. The Council of Trent was reaffirmed by Vatican I and II --1960)

Compare with:

Acts 13:37-39
(37)  But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.
(38  Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
(39)  And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Romans 4:5-8
(5)  But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
(6)  Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
(7)  Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
(8  Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

Colossians 2:13
(13)  And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;


"No one can know with the certainty of faith ,  that he has obtained the grace of God [anathema to all who claim they know]” (Trent, 6th Ses., Chap. N.)

Another contradiction with the bible.
Compare with:

1 John 5:13
(13)  I have written these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

The universal Catechism of the Catholic Church released by the Vatican in 1993: “Baptism is necessary for salvation ,  the Church does not know of any [other] means . . . that assures entry into eternal beatitude , ”

“,  Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians” (Catechism 1271).

The above contradicts the bible:

Romans 5:1-2
(1)  Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
(2)  By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Romans 3:24-28
(24)  Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
(25)  Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
(26)  To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
(27)  Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
(28)  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Galatians 2:16
(16)  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 3:26
(26)  For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

The bible's accounts show that we are justified/saved by faith in Jesus Christ which does not agree with being justified by faith in Baptism as put forward by Cathecism.

Clear contradiction,won't you say?!!

The Catholic traditions are not contradictory to the Bible, and it is a known fact that the apostles were Catholic. If not would you mind telling me what happened to the Church that Christ founded? If something did happen to it, then wouldn't that make Jesus a liar when he says that the gates of hell shall not prevail against his Church.

Lady,

It is a known fact that the apostles were Catholic?
A known fact to whom?
Most likely a Catholic fact and not a Christian fact.
If they were certainly Catholic,we probably would not be arguing or debating here.

You keep talking about the oral stuff the apostles said.It is only common sense to know that all the oral stuff the apostles spoke about was the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the written stuff which is embodied in the bible is also the gospel of Jesus Christ.Everything they said was about the complete message of the gospel of Christ and the written stuff says everything about that complete message.The principles about the life in Christ are contained in the bible.

All other extra things that were said and might not have been written have been taken care of by the totality of the written epistles and 4 gospels.Saying that the written message/Gospel we have through the bible is not complete or enough for us is equal to saying that the apostles were lying to us because the message that is gotten from the bible when properly interpreted is that :All that we need to walk with Christ is embodied in the bible.

You talk about traditions.The traditions the apostles encouraged were traditions that were borne out of the totality of the complete gospel message which we have today. Any tradition that does not comform completely with the Gospel is utter balderdash and should be thrown away.

Be honest and u should know that most of the Catholic traditions are contradicting what we have as the gospel of Christ.

A set of deceived deceivers that defined your Bible for you, so what does that make you? Or what do you think, the Bible just fell from the sky?

Lady,
they might have defined the bible we see today,but it is a fact that they did not write the bible. The fact is, even if they did define the books to make up the bible, their so called extra traditions and extra biblical practices should not be in contradiction with what the bible puts forward.
There is no place in the bible's accounts that the apostles ever contradicted themselves; therefore, the Catholic traditions would only have been valid if they were in equal harmony with the message from the bible.
And we all know;youself inclusive,that the Catholic traditions,extra biblical practices, are in heavy contradiction with the bible.

They could have presented the manual or guideline(the bible) but have derailed from keeping to it.

ttalks:
bindex,
The bible is the standard by which Christians live their lives and it is from that standard that they will defend their faith whenever it is challenged by people like UIf you choose to disbelieve or ridicule the accounts of the bible, that is ur own funeral.It doesn't change anything about the Christians faith.
However, in response to ur post which says we must sin:
We as Christians must not sin as you put it, but u as a non christian can continue to sin since you already have the nature of sin as ur controlling factor and master over ur life.Infact,u have no choice in the matter; u must sin.
But we Christians will not sin.It is a choice of ours which you do not have since you are a slave to sin.
Why will we as Christians not sin?
Go and read Romans 6:1-23.
Believe it,disbelieve it,ridicule it; - all to ur own funeral. But we as Christians have chosen and will continue to choose not to sin.

And that goes for u mazaje and ur fellow co-conspirators.

bindex,
The bible is the standard by which Christians live their lives and it is from that standard that they will defend their faith whenever it is challenged by people like you.If you choose to disbelieve or ridicule the accounts of the bible, that is ur own funeral.It doesn't change anything about the Christians faith.
However, in response to ur post which says we must sin:
We as Christians must not sin as you put it, but u as a non christian can continue to sin since you already have the nature of sin as ur controlling factor and master over ur life.Infact,u have no choice in the matter; u must sin.
But we Christians will not sin.It is a choice of ours which you do not have since you are a slave to sin.
Why will we as Christians not sin?
Go and read Romans 6:1-23.
Believe it,disbelieve it,ridicule it; - all to ur own funeral. But we as Christians have chosen and will continue to choose not to sin.

Don't mind the catholics.They are just another set of deceieved deceivers.
Check out this article that says a lot about the falsehoods and contradictions existing within their faith:

http://www.letusreason.org/RC19.htm

IMCCN:
If tithe paying is not necessary Jesus would not have made that statement He made in Matthew 23:23
But just like everything else, people will always have, look for, make up and invent reasons for not doing whatever they do not believe in or want to do.

Some of u just keep on showing that u still do not get the complete message the bible is presenting.
The period in which Christ was here on earth before he was crucified and later resurrected was a period in which the law was still in operation.This is indicated by the bible; Galatians 4:4 being one of the verses that point that out:

Galatians 4:4
(4) But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

Based on the fact that the law/old covenant was still in operation, Jesus expected that all instructions of the law were to be kept.
When he made that statement about tithes, he was addressing the pharisees and scribes who he expected to be keepers of the law.
Tithes were part of the law,so Christ expected them to keep the commandment about them along with the other weightier matters of the law.

Now,after Christ's death and resurrection,the law came to an end since it had been fulfiled by him;as indicated by:

Romans 10:4
(4) For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

and many other portions of the bible such as:
Hebrews 8:8-9
Hebrews 8:13
Romans 3:19
Romans 6:14
Galatians 5:18
etc.

So,since the commandment of tithes was one given under the old covenant/law, it is only common sense as indicated by the new covenant that it is no longer a requirement within the new covenant.

Longmanjay,
Since when has pointing out an undeniable fact become being abusive.If ur understanding based on what u communicate is porous,my stating it is simply stating the truth and not being abusive or disrespectful.I would suggest that you really try to get ur facts right about what being abusive and being disrespectful really mean.

Now,that said,I would really like it if u could share what u understand by "the letter killeth and the Spirit giveth life" because ur use of it here;based on what it actually means, is quite inappropriate.

longmanjay:
i stand to differ with you that because Catholics doctrines differ from pentecostal, then it is assume that all Catholics are in error. remember Elijah comment about being the only person serving God and God's reply? This was when it was only Elijah that was openly in opposition to Baal.

In fact, i just came from a journey where a catholic friend was my host, a complete holy ghost filled xian with no guile in his mouth. He is still a catholic, should i condemned him as been lost because he adhered to catholic teachings and worship there? it is not in my jurisdiction or my bondage to do that. so i will say No even though i will agree with you to a certain extent that there are errors in their doctrines just as it is with many pentecostal today.

i think the issue we should pursue is rather one's personal conviction from God through the Holy ghost as promised by Jesus when leaving rather than adhrence to doctrines by splinters groups of the various denomination as we have today especially from the pentecostal, the group both of us unfortunately falls into.

Longmanjay,
u are still showing the level of ur understanding and it is still very porous.The word of God is communicating one single and complete message and if ur life is not being directed by that complete message but is rather being directed by part or some of it,u are still found wanting and cannot claim to be part of the message's purpose.
The fact that a Catholic might have the most holy life u've ever seen is not an issue.The issue is whether this holy life is in complete agreement with the gospel of Christ.The Catholic organization has some major doctrine that affects how other parts of their faith is handled.These major doctrine they have are very faulty so it is only common sense that the other aspects have been affected or corrupted by them.Therefore, the whole thing is wrong no matter the semblance it might bear with the real thing.
You say we both belong to the pentecostal denomination.Well,I have to correct u there.You might belong to that denomination but I do not because the pentecostal denomination too is another one that has very major false doctrines that have negatively affected and corrupted the rest of the doctrine within;thereby making it false.
I do not belong to any denomination but the simple body of Christ that is propagated by the word of God.

longmanjay:
God on the last day will not judge us according to these doctrines propagated as the 'real doctrine' by all this splinter groups especially in the pentecostal circles, it is a simple thing, just like the parable of the talents , give account of what you have done with your life or the the salvation we all says we got from Jesus.

Jesus kind of religion is the only religion that needs individual 'persuasion' not congregational, you have to be persuaded by yourself that you are Christ's - born again.

for instance i am persuaded close to 3 decades now that Jn 1:12 is REAL in my life. i am His, in fact i have come to a level that i know i am eternally sold to Christ, condemned to heaven, i myself cannot reverse it again - not even my actions deeds and words can reverse God's seal of sonship in my life anymore because Christ has completely taken over. if it were before i will be offended by your abusive comments, but i do have a good grasp of you plight - not on a negative side please!.

what i will advise is that you use your spiritual energy to develop yourself instead of wasting it on condemning, criticising and opposing people. That was why i initially says we should use philip 4:8 as guideline. the time is shorter than before. the guy with one talents was full of criticsm which the master did not object but pointed him to the real issue, were you productive with the resources God gave you?

so ttalks unless you are convinced that the resources God gave you, is sent to these men of God and to people like us 'who live in error' because we do not join you to condemn them, then go ahead with your gospel of criticism and condemnation, so that your ' 2' and '5' talents of resources may bear you double at the day of reckoning.

However if not, i will advise you pray in your closet for their errors and repentance and your reward will be in open, and use most of these resources to trade and gain the objectives, goals and purpose of your destiny by God - because that is what God will ask you on the last day, not how many errors you detected, also these men of God and ' people like us who do not join you to condemn them too will answer to God independently, are you familiar with the term ' everyone to bear their own cross'?

thanks and God bless

God will judge us all based on the standard he left us with and that standard is the word of God;the complete message within.
Having a life in Christ is being subject to the complete message of the word of God and not just part of it or the part that augurs well with you, so when u say a life in Christ is based on how u are convicted by it,then u are wrong if u are insinuating that the whole message should not apply for u to have that life in Christ.

You talk about spending time praying for those who err from the word of God than pointing out their wrong or critisizing them.Nobody is saying we should not pray for them but alongside praying for them,you should point out their wrong and critisize their wrong so as to hopefully get them to repent and change.The word of God indicates this.You can't just choose the part that goes down well with you and leave the rest.
Being a sincere Christian would mean you both pray for them and also critisize and point out their wrong.That is the complete thing to be done.

Check out the point being communicated in Revelations 2:18-20:

  Revelations 2:18-20
(18  And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;
(19)  I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.
(20)  Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

The passage above shows that God was happy for their good works, but he was displeased by the fact that they still left an aspect undone;they allowed the false prophetess to continue to deceive the people.They did not put up any effort to stop her,point out her wrongdoing or critisize her wrong.

So,in conclusion, the truth will always be the truth.It's either you are in for the whole thing(the complete message of the bible) or you are completely out.

Being unequally yoked describes a situation where the two involved in the yoke are not on the same page about the yoking issue.
Marriage involves having a common sense of values and an equal yoke between its participants.
Unequal yoking occurs when two individuals with different outlooks on the joining factor are put together.
Just like yoking a mule and a goat together to plough a field.That field is definitely going to be unevenly ploughed and the animals involved will definitely be in constant discomfort because they are not evenly/equally yoked.
A horse with another horse = equal yoking
A goat with another goat = equal yoking
A horse with a goat = unequal yoking

The whole concept about 2 corinthians 6:14 is that we should not get involved in a situation with unbelievers where we are left with no choice but to go along or bear the brunt with their decisions whenever they make them.
In situations like friendship and plain associations we have choices as to whether or not to go along or bear the brunt of their decisions or actions,but in marriage, we have no choice.So, marriage is the clear issue at stake here.

Let's put it this way:
Even if 2 Corinthians 6:14 was not refering strictly to marriage as many people here are saying, doesn't its content still forbid marriage to unbelievers?

2Corinthians 6:14
(14)  Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

Doesn't its content suggest that there isn't supposed to be any close or binding union between believers and unbelievers?
Now we know that marriage has binding and very close unions between its participants.Then wouldn't those believers who decide to marry unbelievers be going against this commandment?

I know some people will throw up the question:Why then do we have unbelievers as friends?
Ok then, let's decide to cut off all our ties from unbelievers because of that command(although the bible does not say this ).
Now,after cutting off all ties with unbelievers, does it in anyway now suggest that it is acceptable for a believer to marry an unbeliever? Of course not

This scenario I presented is described thus;in case it isn't understood :

The arguement by those who are saying it is ok for an unbeliever and a believer to get married is based on the fact that 2 corinthians 6:14 is not restricted to marriage or is not even talking about marriage but is referring to associations.
If that is the case,it automatically means it doesn't give room or accept marriages between unbelievers and believers because marriage can never come about without association first taking place.

So, busybein,lady,welsley,etc, whether you argue that it is not talking about marriage or not restricted to marriage alone,the end of it all is that it still does not promote marriage between believers and unbelievers because;according to your arguements,it is restricting associations between believers and unbelievers.
And we know that marriage definitely involves association between its participants.

Welsley,
when I say a person is inconsistent in the faith,it simply means he or she is not allowing the provisions of the faith to rule his/her life in most issues.
That is my point,and it clearly explains the scenario u painted as regards a Christian seeking divorce from a partner who smokes,drinks,etc.The divorce seeking in that case and the bad habits in that case are examples of inconsistensy in their faith.
The fact that u have an example of a Christian/muslim marriage that is working is not the issue or the point.Examples or experiences are never yardsticks to build theories on issues concerning God.The word of God is the only acceptable yardstick.

busybein,
Believers will always agree in faith.If there is no agreement,it's either one or the both of them are not believers.
Most of the so called pastors and bishops u require examples from are not believers cos most of them base their life and beliefs on another gospel;a false gospel,not the gospel of Christ.
Besides,people's examples are not what we draw authorities from;the word of God is the only point we draw authorities on any issue.
As u won't answer my question,I will simply draw my conclusion based on ur comments here and there.Ur partner in marriage is probably an unbeliever,which makes ur view on the matter at hand a very biased one and not objective.

busybein and the others who're asking funny questions about agreement,,
The agreement in question here has to do with agreement of faith.Unbelievers and believers can never be in agreement in terms of faith.That agreement is the catalyst for the two flesh to become one;the requirement for a Godly marriage.
Marriages btw believers which fail are due to inconsistencies in the faith by either or the two of them and not because they are believers.
busybein,are u going to answer the question I asked or not?

@busybein,
you say unbelievers and believers can be in agreement in certain issues.But in marriage,they are never in agreement;hence the differing faiths.And God has said that in marriage,the two shall be one flesh,and that is based on agreement which clearly is not possible in the scenario u are hailing.
Now,a question I'd like to ask u and hope for an honest answer:
The person u are married/yoked to,is he a believer or not?

olabowale:
@ttalks:
Could the second son be the only son when the first son is still alive? Of course not. The only one who could be the only son, if there is no death amongst the siblings is always the first son. And the title of the only son will die on him, when another son is born.

Interestingly, the arabs are numerous by far than the Israelites. I wonder who is the son of sacrifice was? It could never be the second son. Never.

You draw ur inspiration from the Koran;that is why u say what u say.

I along with every other sincere Christian draw our inspiration and views from the Bible.Based on the bible's accounts,Isaac was the only son of Abraham who was recognized by God because it was he God promised to Abraham to bear through Sarah.Ishmael was a result of Abraham and Sarah trying to help God.
As a result of the fact that Ishmael was not part of the promise God made to Abraham, he was not recognized by God.
Based on that, God had every right to call Isaac Abraham's only son.And Isaac was the son that Abraham did not withhold from sacrificing to God.

You can continue to draw ur views from the Koran which has a different version, while we who are Christians will draw ours from the bible.

longmanjay:
i ve been on both extreme and also in the middle of the continum with this 'know it all' attitude you guys have. i am quite sure you are in your early or late twenties rarely thrities. i got born again in the early 80s when most of you i suppose were stil in your dapers (chukles ) so i know when i see youths with zeal defending their 'gospel'. All i am saying is that if you are not sent , do pretend to be a messenger that was not sent.

I am sorry if i offended you by the impression you have of me as been a 'false person or xian' , however if the holy spirit who bears witness with me now that i am a son of God Jn 1:12, then let everyman be a liar and God be true. the same goes for these men of God you called false teachers. i beleive if Jesus called them clean and you say otherwise, then God have mercy on your soul and may the mercy of God be applied to us all in jesus name.

God bless you

Longmanjay,

when u make references to the time u got born again and how old I might be in relation to the truth about the gospel, u've made absolutely no sense.
For example, look at the Catholic church; have they not been in existence for many generations,and don't we both know that their doctrine is false due to false interpretations they made from the bible?

These popular men of God u so much admire and respect were also respected by me before, but not anymore.You might ask why.
Well it is simply because, after proper study of the bible as required by the words in it, I came to realize that most of the doctrine propagated by these men were false and in contradiction to what the word of God says.
They've taken so many parts of God's word and built unimaginable theories that are in direct contradiction to the word of God.
Based on that, the gospel that they preach is not the gospel of Jesus Christ but another gospel.

Examples of part of God's word that they've bastardized is "the letter killeth but the spirit giveth life";2 corinthians 3:6, and the "touch not mine anointed and do my prophets no harm";Psalm 105:15 .
Poju Oyemade;on one of his tv broadcasts I watched once completely twisted another part of God's word into meaning something else completely from what was originally intended by the originator of the word.And that portion is Romans 10:8.

So u see, this men are no longer popular with me and a whole lot of sincere Christians because they are twisting God's word into something it is not meant to be and we have been warned in the bible to avoid such people,rebuke them and warn others of their deception.

If they still are favorites to you;which they obviously are,I'm sorry to say that u too are living in the deception of their words and doctrines.

Isa 53:1-12
(1) Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
(2) For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.
(3) He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
(4) Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
(5) But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
(6) All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
(7) He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
(8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
(9) And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
(10) Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
(11) He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
(12) Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

This is another one.I doubt if it will be clear enough for you.

But note one thing:
When prophesies were/are made they are never direct or straight forward.They require faith and the enlightenement of God to understand and believe their fulfilment/manifestations.

Also,the old testament paved way for the new;it pointed out aspects of the new,which involved Jesus Christ.It did not have any reason to predict the 2nd coming of Christ since it's purpose was to present the 1st coming of Christ which was for the salvation of man.The new covenant was the reasonable one to predict the 2nd coming.Simple order of things.

My 1st response was to show u how bad ur views are.That comment on its covers everything about what Christ came to do.It covers his purpose and it covers his death and resurrection.It's just that ur preconcieved views will not allow u to see that.

Mr. Huxley.
You just have a way of going on and on about things you obviously do not understand.If u do not understand what the scriptures say, that is ur own personal problem.
What u've said here is just proof that u do not understand anything in the bible.If u claim that the old testament never said anything about Jesus being the salvation of human beings it shows the limit of ur understanding;very porous.
I will not waste my time arguing over this issue with u becaus it's of no use.
You are obviously one of the lost ones that probably has no part in God's salvation.For ur information, this salvation that is talked about in the bible has been earmarked for a select people; some people will not have a part in it.
Everything u're doing here;disagreeing and disproving of what the bible says, is no surprise.
It is all part of God's plan.So,no matter what you say or do,just know that u are simply fulfilling ur purpose as planned by God.

I'll leave u with this little info about one part in the old testament that talked about Jesus and what he was coming to do for his elect:

Genesis 22:15-18
(15)  And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
(16)  And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
(17)  That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
(18)  And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Galatians 3:6-29
(6)  Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
(7)  Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
(8  And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
(9) So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
(10)  For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
(11)  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
(12)  And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
(13)  Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
(14) That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
(15)  Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
(16)  Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
(17)  And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
(18)  For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
(19)  Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
(20)  Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
(21)  Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
(22)  But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
(23)  But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
(24)  Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
(25)  But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
(26)  For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
(27)  For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
(28)  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
(29)  And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

This is just one of the parts of the old testament that talked about Christ and his purpose on earth as clearly explained in the new testament.I don't expect this to change ur mind; I'm only laying down an undeniable fact.

It is more frutiful to debate with others who believe in Christ but might be going about the faith wrongly than to waste precious energy trying to convince someone who obviously does not believe in God because he has been given over to a reprobate mind by God;Romans 1:28.

However u want to continue as regards these truths are ur own business.As I will always say, you are simply playing out ur role as commissioned by God.

longmanjay:
everybody on this blog should be wary of people like naomijt. they run a blog with one yomisays!, ALL I CAN DEDUCE IS THAT THAT they pull down men of God like The pastor Adeboye, Oyedepo, oyahilomhe, late benson idahosha and most fore runners of the gospel in nigeria, you won't believe it even people like Pa Akindayomi who started The redeem christain church of God. faith preachers such kenneth copeland, crefo dollars, kenneth hagin, rick warren, Kc price and the likes.

PLEASE AVOID THEM. I WILL ADVISE EVERYBODY ON THIS BLOG TO IGNORE NAOMIJT OR ANYONE OF THEM THAT WILL WANT TO START A STRIFE WITH THE GOSPEL HERE. THEY ARE NOTHING BUT WILD WINDS!!!. THEIR CRITICISM RATHER DRAW PEOPLE AWAY FROM GOD THAN TO HEAVEN!!!!, BEWARE OF THEM

Mr. Longmanjay, you shld be the one people shld avoid because u refuse to acknowledge the truth and thereby encourage deception among a lot of folks.These men whom u obviously rever(Adeboye,Oyedepo,Oyakhilome,Oyemade) are people who have given a false representation of the gospel of Jesus Christ and shld be marked and avoided;- Romans 16:17-18.

Don't look on this men because of their achievements;rather make sure they're doing the right things.And I tell u,those men are on the wrong path.

God speaks to us - THROUGH THE SCRIPTURES.There's nothing new that God says to us except to confirm his scripture to us.
Do not mind those Pastors that say, "God told me that this year shall be a year of blessing for you."
                                                          "God told me that the pregnant women will give birth this year."
                                                          "God told me that there would be a supernatural wave in Christianity this year."
                                                          "God told me that you must give of all you have to get a magnificent and unexplainable blessing."
                                                          "God told me that you should not go to Kano because ur blessing is in Sabongida."
                                                          "God told me that Brother Pious is your husband to be."
                                                           .etc.

LIARS,all of them.

God speaks to us but only through Scriptures.The Holy Spirit confirms these words in the scripture in our minds/spirits.
God does not say anything that is foreign to scriptures or is new to scriptures.

Majority of the Nigerian Pastors are deceiving majority of the Nigerians.They've misrepresented Christianity so badly that they've allowed people like the muslims and some others to have the wrong view of what Christianity is about.Most of them are from the popular and well known churches of today.When you hear muslims criticizing Christianity, it is always that misrepresented view that they criticize cos they have not had the opportunity of experiencing or viewing the proper Christianity.

But thank God that there are a few Nigerian pastors and a few Nigerians who practice and preach true Christianity.

Tithe paying in the church today is against the New covenant.This is not an issue of "I will pay if I feel like it".It is not supported by the new covenant.
Tithing was instituted under the old testament/covenant.

The new testament replaced the old; it did not join it, it did not buttress it, it did not come to support it - it completely replaced it (Hebrews 8:8-13).
Since the old testament was replaced, it is only common sense that all the laws included in it have gone with it.
The new testament has its own set of laws within; contained within instructions and doctrines. Some of this laws are similar or the same to some in the old testament.But the point to be noted is that - those laws in the old testament that are appearing in the new were clearly specified eg. marriage issues.Those that were not specified are not part of the new covenant.

The new testament was fashioned out by removing most of the old laws and retaining some relevant laws and refining them, and then adding new laws and then instituting a new approach of becoming a part of it.

Now, among the laws of the new testament/covenant, tithing is not part of it, else it would have been clearly mentioned that it was a part.

The summary of this tithing issue is this:
Paying of tithes is not part of the new testament law, therefore it means it went away with the old covenant;it wasn't retained, neither was it refined.
Therefore it should not be a part of a Christian's life because the Christian's life is fashioned after the new covenant and not the old.
Since tithing is firmly established as part of the old covenant law, it is safe to conclude that Christians paying tithes are doing a law of the old testament and have the issue of Galatians 5:4 upon them because they are trying to please God by observing a part of an abolished law.

Giving of varying forms however is in support of the new covenant. This giving is to be done based on the determination of the giver; as he/she determines or decides as regards why,to whom, to what purpose and the quantity involved.
This giving is established in terms of meeting needs.Giving is not restricted to finances and church issues.Giving has to do with meeting the needs of people as they arise.

Finally, all this issue about tithes has nothing to do with the hole it might be creating in some people's pocket when they pay it or not but whether it is contained within the covenant that fashioned out Christianity; and that is the new covenant.

Tasma:
**sigh**
Ok I hear you. God’s word does not have to sense to us. Even when all our analytical reasoning tells us the opposite we just must believe. To enter the Kingdom of heaven we must believe that Jonah lived in the belly of a whale for 3 days, we must believe the whole earth was submerged in a great flood and a pair of all animals in the world survived in a boat, we must believe God instructed kids to be killed for mocking an old man, we must believe a woman turned round to look at city and turned into a pillar of salt. All this things we must believe if we are to avoid going to hell. At times it’s makes me wonder why God even bothered giving us a brain. We obviously need to shelve the use of this organ be at peace with the Lord!

God gave us brains to rationalize our normal life here on earth, and also to rightly divide his scriptures when we are saved. Our brains in terms of God's word are only useful to get the whole picture of the bible; not to pick out selections and build wild theories out of.An unsaved person will never be able to make any sense out of God's word and God knows this; that was why the bible said in:

1Corinthians 2:14
(14)  But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Reading verse 13 before 14 also helps shed more light on why this is so.

Except you are spiritual(saved) and have the Holy Spirit residing within you, all you will ever be able to do is make human/natural rationalization about these issues and they will never make sense to you.
It is the Holy Spirit within us saved folks that makes the things of the bible make sense to us.

Tasma:
@ttalks
This argument is one i've heard quite a bit and I just can't fathom it. You must realise the implication of your comments above. First why did God only have a pact with Israelites back then. Did other people, Africans, Chinese, Indians, Red Indians not exist then? Or did God simply find it unnecessary to deal with the rest of the world back then? Secondly why would an all powerful, all knowing God find it necessary to instruct his "people" to kill, rape, take slaves, stone people to death back then! Was it out of God's power to give people the grace needed to live decently back then? Did he have to wait for centuries of barbaric existence of man before deciding to make a change.

When you read a verse that says "if a man works on the sabbath he should be put to death" can you think of any good reason why that law should have existed at any time in mankinds history at all? How about the right to buy children of strangers - is that easier to understand?

The simple explanation - which most bible apologists find hard to accept - is that the verses are not God's word at all. This are laws made by barbaric ancient cultures that have no application in todays world. They were simply called God's word because it made it easier to implement that way. Same way football fans motivate themselves by saying God is behind us.

Read the last comment i made here, think about it and honestly tell me if you don't think this explanation makes more sense than saying at some point in history God felt if a man cheats on his wife he should be put to death. Cheers

Read the whole bible to get the complete and meaningful story.Don't just generalize on the passages that seem evil to you. One thing you should realize is that God is the creator of all existence and does things according to his will and pleasure; no one can question him! God had a plan and his plan involved the Israelites alone; brought about by the promise established by God to Abraham(the Israelites are offshoots from Abraham). Abraham was the only one that God found worthy on earth among every other people there;that was why he made the promise to him cos he pleased him. The promise was to provide salvation to all mankind through his seed but the fulfillment of this promise was for a set time established by God(When you make a promise,the time of fulfillment is always up to you,right?). If any other person had pleased God instead of Abraham, definitely,the promise would have been made to such and probably, the covenant of old would have been between God and another set of people.The covenant was set up between God and the Israelites alone cos of Abraham and the promise; it never involved any other nation.
God did not deal with the other races back then because it was not involved in his well laid out plan - doing so would have messed up the plan. He could give the people the grace to live decently back then, but again, he didn't because he wanted it to be as he planned from the very beginning. He wanted that grace to come through Abraham's seed; which is Christ.

God had a plan how humanity would play out their roles and how they would end it ever before he set them(humanity) into existence; so that is all that happened. It's not a question of  - "couldn't he", "shouldn't he have". Just like some one said before on this site, it's like he wrote a script and the humans are playing it out in accordance.

The laws back then were what guided the agreement or the covenant of old; any one who broke them was subject to the punishment - whether it made sense or not. The people knew this.
But whatever the case maybe, all that do not matter again. When the time came, God said he was setting up another covenant that would be much better than that of old - Jeremiah 31:31-33 and Hebrews 8:8-10.Which was to bring about the establishment of his promise to Abraham since the early days.

The new covenant covers both the Israelites and the rest of the world; that is, those who chose to be part of it.

We are God's people; his creation.Whether it makes sense to you or not, we are all fulfilling our roles in God's plan and purpose for humanity; even you that is not in agreement with the bible and its sayings, and also those who do not believe in God.
That's just the way it is. It doesn't have to make sense to everybody; God intended it that way.

If you want to rationalise that God in the old testament is different from God in the new testament because it seemed he was inconsistent with himself in the new, then that's just too bad.
God is God and you are you.You will only understand why he is the way he is based on what you know.
I will leave you with the only verses that best describe him and the seeming inconsistencies you seem to draw ur logic from:

Rom 9:15-17
(15)  For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
(16)  So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
(17)  For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
(18  Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
(19)  Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
(20)  Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
(21)  Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

And just a few verses out of numerous that show that the God in the old testament is the same God in the new:

Galatians 3:1-29
(1)  O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
(2)  This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
(3)  Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
(4)  Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
(5)  He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
(6)  Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
(7)  Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
(8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
(9)  So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
(10)  For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
(11)  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
(12)  And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
(13)  Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
(14)  That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
(15)  Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
(16)  Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
(17)  And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
(18)  For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
(19)  Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
(20)  Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
(21)  Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
(22)  But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
(23)  But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
(24)  Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
(25)  But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
(26)  For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
(27)  For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
(28)  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
(29) And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Bastage:
Idiot. That is the whole point of my argument - The God of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament.
Why am I going to use the God of the New Testament to justify the God of the Old when he's not even relevant?

Bastage,

Your statement here really puts you in a bad light.The simple conclusion is you have absolutely no idea about the message being put forward by the bible.
The God of the bible is the same God in both the old and new testaments.
You can't get the complete message of the bible without taking in the accounts of the old testament.The old testament talked about the new;it paved the way for the new.
The old testament talked about Jesus Christ and what he was coming to do.The sum total of the old and the new testaments is Jesus Christ.
Everything that happened in the old testament was all for the purpose of the new.
Jesus Christ and the salvation he brought unto mankind is the sum total of the bible(Old and New testaments).
If you can't get that message from reading the whole bible properly, then I just have to conclude that there is no point in debating with you.

Quote from: Bastage on Today at 12:23:01 AM

What the law is doing is basically forcing the woman to marry her rapist so that any child produced in the act would keep the chain going.

This statement is not consistent with scriptures.Are u forgetting verses 25-27?
The women that were raped were not forced to marry their rapists, rather the rapist was killed.(25-27)
The only women that got married to the so called 'rapists' were those who were not engaged to any body else at the time.(28-29)
The other group were those who did not scream for help when there was obvious help available(indicating consent)and those were killed.(23-24)

Three different scenarios and only one of them where the woman had to marry the man that slept with her.