₦airaland Forum

OLAADEGBU:
I agree with the Scriptures that says anyone who refuses to genuinely embrace the gospel truth will be given over to a "powerful delusion" by God. Those who refuse come to the gospel light will be given over into darkness. The gospel truth says:

"For by grace are you saved through faith: and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast" (Ephesians 2:8,9).

We can see that no one will be saved through their own goodness, good works, self righteousness, religious works, not even by our own faith. It is only by the grace of God for faith is the medium God uses to extend His grace to us.

Just as your endtime Churches have refused to accept the truth and are now given to powerful delusion.

aaccountable1:
"66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

 67  Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

 68  Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life"( John 6:66-67)

Jesus did not bind any of his followers with an oath. not a single example is found in the new testament where believers a bound with such an oath.

when you bind people under such an oath it becomes a cult and no longer Christ.

Vows are not alien to the Christian faith. In fact the apostle Paul is recorded to have made a vow in act18:18



KJV: And Paul after this tarried there yet a
good while, and then took his leave of the
brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and
with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn
his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.


As you can see a Christian may make a vow to God, and when he does it is to be treated with seriousness for scriptures say my vows to the LORD i will fulfil.


Fr edet made vows voluntarily to God and his Church to give his life for Service in the Church in a priestly capacity, to obey his superiors in all that isn't sinful, to live the radical life spoken in scriptures to give all for the sake of the gospel.

If he no longer wish to live that life then his decision will be conveyed to the pope so the he can be freed from his vows to enable him lead the life he now wishes.


The bishop is simply doing the needful, he has been stripped of all rights and privileges and faculties, titles etc of a priest, the last part is for him to be released from his vows of Service, the pope is the person competent when it comes to removing people from the clerical state and dispensing from vows made to God and the Church.



There is nothing Wrong going on here.

NoToPile:
"Me and my group of christians" seriously?

Anyway the church referred to in the scriptures is an embodiment of christains from all denominations not just one like you think and this statement of mine seems to be the one you( I am almost tempted to add " and your likes" ) have a problem with.

As for your questions I will rather pass.

Have a nice day.

The Church in scriptures is not a collection of denomination. There were no denomination then just the one Church with one faith. That one Church was later called the Catholic Church in the 2nd century because its mission is to the whole world.

Your so - called denominations came 1500yrs later as enterprise formed by men preaching contradictory doctrines and dividing the body of Christ for personal gain and glory.



So sorry your church wasn't the one Jesus said the gate of Hell will not prevail against, he was talking about the Church he built on the foundation of the apostle. If your church cannot trace itself back to 2000yrs ago to the apostles then you are in a Church of men.. . Some one's enterprise and the gate of Hell will certainly prevail there because it isn't the Church Jesus established on the apostles.


Sorry your denominations doesn't count for much.

The Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius XII on the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary
Your body is holy and glorious
In their sermons and speeches on the feast day of the Assumption of the Mother of God, the holy fathers and the great doctors of the church were speaking of something that the faithful already knew and accepted: all they did was to bring it out into the open, to explain its meaning and substance in other terms. Above all, they made it most clear that this feast commemorated not merely the fact that the blessed Virgin Mary did not experience bodily decay, but also her triumph over death and her heavenly glory, following the example of her only Son, Jesus Christ.
Thus St John Damascene, who is the greatest exponent of this tradition, compares the bodily Assumption of the revered Mother of God with her other gifts and privileges: It was right that she who had kept her virginity unimpaired through the process of giving birth should have kept her body without decay through death. It was right that she who had given her Creator, as a child, a place at her breast should be given a place in the dwelling-place of her God. It was right that the bride espoused by the Father should dwell in the heavenly bridal chamber. It was right that she who had gazed on her Son on the cross, her heart pierced at that moment by the sword of sorrow that she had escaped at his birth, should now gaze on him seated with his Father. It was right that the Mother of God should possess what belongs to her Son and to be honoured by every creature as the God’s Mother and handmaid.
St Germanus of Constantinople considered that the preservation from decay of the body of the Mother of God, the Virgin Mary, and its elevation to heaven as being not only appropriate to her Motherhood but also to the peculiar sanctity of its virgin state: It is written, that you appear in beauty, and your virginal body is altogether holy, altogether chaste, altogether the dwelling-place of God; from which it follows that it is not in its nature to decay into dust, but that it is transformed, being human, into a glorious and incorruptible life, the same body, living and glorious, unharmed, sharing in perfect life.
Another very ancient author asserts: Being the most glorious Mother of Christ our saviour and our God, the giver of life and immortality, she is given life by him and shares bodily incorruptibility for all eternity with him who raised her from the grave and drew her up to him in a way that only he can understand.
All that the holy fathers say refers ultimately to Scripture as a foundation, which gives us the vivid image of the great Mother of God as being closely attached to her divine Son and always sharing his lot.
It is important to remember that from the second century onwards the holy fathers have been talking of the Virgin Mary as the new Eve for the new Adam: not equal to him, of course, but closely joined with him in the battle against the enemy, which ended in the triumph over sin and death that had been promised even in Paradise. The glorious resurrection of Christ is essential to this victory and its final prize, but the blessed Virgin’s share in that fight must also have ended in the glorification of her body. For as the Apostle says: When this mortal nature has put on immortality, then the scripture will be fulfilled that says “Death is swallowed up in victory”.
So then, the great Mother of God, so mysteriously united to Jesus Christ from all eternity by the same decree of predestination, immaculately conceived, an intact virgin throughout her divine motherhood, a noble associate of our Redeemer as he defeated sin and its consequences, received, as it were, the final crowning privilege of being preserved from the corruption of the grave and, following her Son in his victory over death, was brought, body and soul, to the highest glory of heaven, to shine as Queen at the right hand of that same Son, the immortal King of Ages.





Happy solemnity of the assumption.

johnw74:
u idol lovers dictus and briar of course don't believe God
u believe God cannot do whatever He wills, and u think u can do contrary to what He said
that's how u God haters are:

(Exo 20:4) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
(Exo 20:5) Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

2 Timothy 2:23-24

23 Don’t have anything to do with
foolish and stupid arguments, because
you know they produce quarrels. 24
And the Lord’s servant must not be
quarrelsome but must be kind to
everyone, able to teach, not resentful.




. 2 Timothy 2:16 However,
avoid pointless discussions.
For people will become more
and more ungodly.

OLAADEGBU:
You almost saw the light. Secular dictionaries whose authors are not born again cannot help you to see the light.

now that the dictionary show your definition is Wrong. You go and accuse the dictionary.








Dictionary defines words and it is competent competent in doing so. That shows you are Wrong.

Dahustler007 :, babacele, those guys arent ready to reason, all they want to do is accuse. Leave them be. Do not throw pearl before swine.

OLAADEGBU:
"Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son" (Colossians 1:13).

You need to first of all be delivered from the powers of darkness that is holding you from seeing the light of the gospel truth.

2 thess 2::10bb

They
perish because they refused to love the
truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason
God sends them a powerful delusion so that
they will believe the lie 12 and so that all
will be condemned who have not believed
the truth but have delighted in wickedness

johnw74:
u rc dictus would maintain that the truth is fallacy, that's what u rc's do

with so much child sexual abuse going on in the rcc
of course that is from satan, just as all the un Bibical
doctrine that is part of rcc is from satan
u r wrong yet again dictus, or should i say:
u r still wrong dictus

am i sure sin is also found in your church, I guess that means it comes from the the devil too.

UnchangeableGod:
You are wrong sir. Saul of Tarsus who was renamed Paul after his conversion was not ordained a priest after the tradition of the Roman Catholic Church. He did not attend Seminary preparatory to becoming a priest after the Order of Melchizedek. It was after his conversion that he was commissioned for the ministry having been selected by the Holy Spirit along with Barnabas. My point is that the Roman Catholic priesthood is alien to the New Testament. It is purely Roman Catholic dogma. You may as well show me the scriptural justification from the other 'books that were omitted from the Bible' according to you.

Do not be ignorant.

The Catholic priesthood priesthood does not consist in seminary attendance, that is simply a requirement to ensure a priest priest is well learned and knowledgeable. One becomes a priest when he is laid hands upon by the bishop and the presbytery and empowered for the priestly ministry of the new testament.


Just as Paul was ordained, so catholic priests. That is the Catholic tradition and has been observed for 2000yrs

UnchangeableGod:
According to Church history, about 73 books were recommended by the Church Fathers to be considered for canonization as Scripture. After prayerful and careful consideration by Spirit filled men of God using certain parameters and yardsticks, 66 of them passed the test and became canon. Littje wonder, whatever you need and will ever need, whatever is of concern to any human being born or yet to be born, there is provision for it in the (66 books of the canonized) holy Bible. Go no further sir except there is something else, other than how to walk and please God as well as get His abiding presence and reward in this world and hereafter that you are looking for.

No you are Wrong again.


The books considered were about 100 the books canonised were 73, after 1000 years martin letter started the Protestant Church and removed 7 books.


You Protestants have an incomplete bible.

UnchangeableGod:
And how do I find where the early Church fathers live or lived sir?

read up the writing of the Early Church fathers and you will know where they lived.

701ecilana:
Ubenedictus. I was there and I covered them up. You know what am talking about.

I am not you. That you will will do such despicable thing such as covering for a crime doesn't mean i'll do do same.

moneychannel:
I am not understanding
It's not by force to remain a Rev Fr. It's his choice, whether Pope hears it or not, he has decided.

To become a priest is not by force, but once you become a priest you are bound by the promises and vows you made to God to serve him and his Church. He knew all these when he became priest he knew what the priesthood demands, he knew the promises he made to God and his Church. It is very posible to resign, but he also knows the process, he needs to be freed from the promises he made... He knows the process, his bishop will forward his resignation to the pope and the he will be freed from the reponsibilities of the priesthood. This is what happens whenever a priest wishes to resign.

brunofarad:
To become a priest is not by force
He has every right to resign if he thinks he can't keep to his vows as a Catholic priest.
Rather than constituting nuisance.








Meanwhile
☀[color=#1e90ff]Today in History :[/color] August 14 1893 , France becomes the first country to introduce motor vehicle registration.

To become a priest is not by force, but once you become a priest you are bound by the promises and vows you made to God to serve him and his Church.

He knew all these when he became priest he knew what the priesthood demands, he knew the promises he made to God and his Church.

It is very posible to resign, but he also knows the process, he needs to be freed from the promises he made... He knows the process, his bishop will forward his resignation to the pope and the he will be freed from the reponsibilities of the priesthood. This is what happens whenever a priest wishes to resign.

johnw74:
i maintain that child sexual abuse is from the devil

u maintain that it isn't, such is the fallacy of roman catholics

I have seen you playing dumb before, I know it very well now. Atleast i know you are dumb on purpose.



You said :


with the rcc being rife with priests comitting
sexual assault on children
it's clear that their god-their originator of church
doctrine which goes against God's word, is
satan.



I maintain that the argument you made above is fallacious.

OLAADEGBU:
Wrong again. Adam had a relationship with God before the fall not religion. .

Please show me the dictionary that says:



Religion is trying to cover up your unclothedness with your work of righteousness.



Or did you manufacture that one from thin air as usual.

OLAADEGBU:
You seem to have forgotten the ones who teach and practise false doctrines. A quick look at the threads below will remind you of the obvious.

https://www.nairaland.com/2422498/list-false-teachings-roman-catholic

https://www.nairaland.com/2342759/testimony-former-jesuit-priest

Sorry, I know you are a member of an endtime Church that teaches endtime heresies so i am not surprised that true historic Christian teaching seem odd to you.



The bible talks about a delusion in the last days it has fallen on the endtime heretics, you cant even differentiate historic Christian teaching from the dung you were fed in your church, it is a pity.

701ecilana:
Will you admit to them? Would i have admitted to them while still there?

Why not?

OLAADEGBU:
The Jews in the OT didn't have to wait for the Vatican to finalise the canon. They recognised the God breathed Word as soon it was written or spoken and kept it in the Ark of Covenant. Likewise, the early Christians recognised the God breathed Word of God and could differentiate it from the apocrypha.

the writings in the ARK was the Law not even the entire scriptures. So i ask you again do you know when the Jews finalised their Canon? Please answer with a reputable source.


2.

Are you aware that at the time of Jesus different Jews had different books as scriptures? Are you aware the Sadducees only had 5 books in their bible? Are you aware the pharisees had more books than them? The essene Jews had more books than the pharisees.


So do you know when the jewish canon was finalised? Remember to add a reputable source.

UnchangeableGod:
Was Paul the Apostle ordained a priest in the Roman Catholic tradition then?

Yes


To ordain is for a minister to lay hands on the ordained for the ministry. Paul was ordained for ministry in Antioch.



While they were worshiping the Lord and
fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me
Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have
called them.’ So after they had fasted and prayed,
they placed their hands on them and sent them
off. Acts 13:2-3

.

Ubenedictus:
James 5 actually says:


Therefore confess your sins to each other and
pray for each other so that you may be
healed. The prayer of a righteous person is
powerful and effective.



The word "therefore" tells us that the following precept is simply a continuation and conclusion of the previous discourse.


What was the preceding discourse that verse 16 concludes,? Here it is.

Is any man sick among you? Let him bring in
the presbyter of the church, and let them pray
over him, anointing him with oil in the name of
the Lord.


So Yeah the Church leader i. E the priest is What is been referred to if you read in context.

Sacluxpaint:
It said confess to ONE ANOTHER, the context before it said called the presbyter, other versions said church elders. What does one another mean?

I don't know how you guys interpret what is not written.

It says THEREFORE, that means it is a continuation of the previous discourse, read in context.

701ecilana:
In Auchi.

the bishop of auchi is most. Rev. Dr. Gabriel G. Dunia. He is a very down to earth person, please give the name of the convent and tell me if you 'll be happy to report them.

OLAADEGBU:
We are talking of the apocrypha here and my position is that neither Jesus nor his apostles quoted from it. Jesus and his disciples were all from Galilee except for Judas Iscariot. Christianity started with the Israelites in Israel and it would be preposterous to assume that the Jews did not accept the gospel, yes not all accept it but as many as received Him were given the power to become the sons of God (John 1:12).

do you know when the Jews finalised their canon?

blackbriar:
YOU SAID IMAGES AND I QUOTE IMAGES FOR YOU

THE CRUCIFIX, THE DOVE, THE ARK OF THE COVENANT, THE PAINTINGS OF THE HOLY FAMILY AND THE LAST SUPPER.

You should have seen that he is purposely playing dumb. He doesn't want to reason he only wants to accuse.

UnchangeableGod:
Yes, every Christian is part of the royal priesthood. What I meant by Christ's priesthood not having a human proxy is that the system of ordaining some clergy priests in the 'Order of Melchizedek' is alien to the New Testament based on the Scriptures.

There is also a ministerial priesthood in the new covenant, that is the priesthood of those ordained in the line of the apostles....






Romans 15:15-16 --"But I have
written to you rather boldly in
some respects to remind you,
because of the grace given me by
God to be a minister of Christ
Jesus to the Gentiles in performing
the PRIESTLY service of the Gospel
of God, so that the offering up of
the Gentiles may be acceptable,
sanctified by the Holy Spirit."

Sacluxpaint:
Does it matter?

yes it does, the context says call the presbyter.

OLAADEGBU:
"But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in" (Matthew 23:13).

See the reason why Jesus demands that you let His people go.

2 Timothy 4:3-4

3 For the time will come when
people will not put up with sound
doctrine. Instead, to suit their own
desires, they will gather around them a
great number of teachers to say what
their itching ears want to hear. 4
They will turn their ears away from the
truth and turn aside to myths.





You see why one shouldn't follow endtime Churches like yours in their endtime heresies?

johnw74:
u r blinded to think child sexual abuse in the rcc is fallacy
and because it may exist in other churches to a lesser degree doesn't
make it any less evil, your reasoning is of the devil

oh, I know what child abuse is an the gravity of such grave sin. That isn't A fallacy.



The fallacy is your silly argument that says "since the CC has abusers that means it comes from satan.... That argument is inherently fallacious and i am surprised that an educated man made such a stu.pid argument.

OLAADEGBU:
Wrong! Adam knew and believed in God before he fell. It was when he began to cover up with leaves that started religion.

sorry, religion is belief in a supreme being and its attendant actions.

So adam already practiced religion before the fall .

johnw74:
another rc priest is to face the court over sexual assault of minors,
this time a cardinal, cardinal pell, personal adviser to the pope

with the rcc being rife with priests comitting sexual assault on children
it's clear that their god-their originator of church doctrine which goes against God's word, is satan.

satan loves to put God last, and he has rc's praying to mary more than to God
10 hail marys to 1 our Father

satan has rcc honouring mary a creation, more than God the creator etc. etc.

one only has to search online to learn all the evil of rcc,
clearly anyone who belongs to satans church, it is because he-she want's to

Let him who is without sin throw the first stone.


I can also show several cases of Protestant pastor with similar sin... I guess that also mean their church was originated by satan.



May God save us from silly fallacy.

Sacluxpaint:
Ok.
Confess your sins to me.

are you a presbyter .?