₦airaland Forum

This was the last topic i expected to see today!

In protestant christianity celibacy has been historically viewed as an unnatural, unwanted, silly baggage, this is the last topics you'll ever hear from a pastors pulpit. Those who even preach celibacy are seen as teaching something unnatural, many on nairaland ignorantly say that celibacy will make a straight person gay or turn him into a pedophile. These are unfortunate insinuations that make celibacy a terrible topic in most churches.


I have only heard an evangelical pastor preach celibacy once and ofcourse the congregation didn't come to church that day with the hope of hearing such wierd sermons.


I hope maybe in the next 100yrs (if the world survives till then), the protestant churches will gain a better appreciation of celibacy.

freshPikin: If you were joking, that'd bother me.


I guess the priests that locate little boys assholes are used by angels.

if i am to take a wild guess i'll say the demon that manipulates men of God into dispicable deeds is related in purpose to the demon that manipulates unbeliever into using sins in the church as avenues to riddicle the christian faith.




Besides what happened to the nl filter?

SalC: Same thing you've been doing in recent times

and that is?

[quote author=striktlymi][/quote]you are simply side stepping the point.

Christ is given to the whole world for a redeemer. True!
From the bible the whole world may learn salvation history, Amen!

That still doesn't stop Christ from coming from the jewish race.
That doesn't mean all the letters on the new t wasn't specifically addressed to the church.

It seem you wish to deny A so B is true.

A and B are bothe true.

The new testament is addressed to the church and contains the salvation history of mankind and Jesus did come as a jew and redeemed all humanity.


I really don't see why you are arguing A is wrong for B to be correct when A doesn't falsify B.



Now i really don't get the thrust of the argument.

shdemidemi: If salvation is by God's grace, can we lose it?

all free gifts can always be rejected!

striktlymi: God does desire the salvation of ALL men...precisely the reason why Jesus asked his Apostles to take the Gospel to the ends of the Earth.

However, there are people who commits very serious sins today e.g suicide, without the knowledge that what they do is wrong. Matter of factly, some cultures hold suicide as very honourable.

Would we say that those people have sufficient grace to know that the act they commit is wrong? Surely, we cannot say that.
Though God will not hold a sin committed in ignorance against the individual but the fact that the individual is ignorant about the sin is evidence enough to show that, as regards that sin, the grace given was not sufficient.

God isn't responsible for the lack of knowledge of sin. Infact it seem he has always guaranteed that we know we have sinned.

"they show that what the law requires is written in their hearts, while the conscience also bears witness..." rm 2:15

every one seem to have a conscience whether it is listened to, silence, ignored, influenced or excused is another story, but God has provided sufficiently for men to know when they sin. This is called conscience.

God considers ignorance in judgement, not because he hasn't provided avenue for knowledge sufficiently but because he has mercy on our weakness.

Besides the jewish culture doesn't support suicide, judas knew exactly what he was doing.

In Judas' case one can argue that he may not have committed suicide with his full consent. Probably his grief blinded him to the realities of life i.e God is good and his Mercies abounds forever.

One cannot be said to have committed a grave sin if there is a shortfall in the individual's consent to that sin. Like I mentioned before, it is very possible that he repented before he drew his last breadth

In all, we truly can't tell if Judas is in Hell as we speak unless it is revealed when we face the hereafter.

you mean in cases of grief or anger or emotion that sin loses value or becomes less sinful? Interesting

it is possible, he repented, but if he did, the words of christ would have little meaning! It seems i'm repeating myself.

I could very well argue that judas had the time to consider his decision and he did it anyway, but i'll let that point slide. If you say is suicide was a non grave sin because he probably didnt willingly end his own life, i doubt you could make the same arguement for his betrayal of Jesus. Instead of repenting of that he ended his life.

alexleo: Bro you have no point pls.

now i feeling like laughing.

Tombilly: Jesus existed before d Jews. He z d first born of all creation. He was present from d beginning. Diz z where d Trinitarian teaching comes in. "Let us create man in our own image and likeness".

and he is human and jewish, that is where the doctrine of the incarnation comes in.

striktlymi: On the contrary, that is your way of avoiding the question. The question is direct enough: Jesus, the Jews...who existed first?

then lets use te sematics.

The person named Jesus pre existed the jews, he even pre-existed human nature. And he did take on human nature which he pre existed, he did come from the jewish race, a race he pre-existed.


His preexistence doesn't make him less jewish, just as his preexistence doesn't make him less human.

How is that for avoiding the question?

shdemidemi: I agree



He isn't the son of perdition bro, he couldn't have been.

Son of perdition describe one who is unsaved hereafter (the devil). God created man to show his attribute of love and mercy, no man can sin beyond God's grace.

'where sin abounded, grace did much more abound'

hahaha,

unfortunately the context doesn't support your theory.

Verse 12 says
"while i was with them"
11 says
"i'm no more in the world but they are in the world and i'm coming to to thee".

Clearly the context is about the apostles, "all i have is theirs" certainly the devil dosn't fit the description. Christ in the whole chapter was praying for his apostles and church. Unless the devil is an apostle i can't see how he fits the context.


Unless ofcuz you are doing "cut and join".

striktlymi: The above still does not conclusively state that Judas is in Hell. The best we can do is assume! That assumption is the very reason I say no one knows for sure.

i think the key is how the passages are interpreted. The son of perdition and the one who chose to be lost, i see as clearly refering to eternal damnation. For me this is clear.


You interprete differently, thus for you it isn't clear.

Simply put: Grace is the undeserved favour we get from God which helps us on our journey of faith, without which we cannot become God's children. In Baptism we achieve the rare privilege of being adoptive Children of God here on Earth.

This privilege is not enjoyed by everyone. In other words, some are more favoured than others. The question then arises: at what point does someone receives enough Grace?

Is it at the point of baptism? the hour of our death? after we pass on? or is it all through life and beyond? Irrespective of when God decides to shower us with his graces, one thing is clear: it is desirable to do the will of God both now and the hereafter.

In my opinion, God's grace would be sufficient at the point where we have the 'tools' needed to achieve the desired height of sanctity both now and beyond. Not every man is given these 'tools', hence the insufficiency of God's Grace.

hmmm...maybe i am misunderstanding your language.

I don't really know if there is ever a time in anyone life when he could be said to have received "enough grace". I usually think of grace in the continous sense.

What i believe is that each believer has been/is given given sufficent grace to attain eternal life, each sincere unbeliever is given sufficient grace unto salvation and each fallen christian sufficient grace unto repentance, (i believe the teaching is called "the universality of grace". If as scripture says God desires the salvation of all men, then it follows that he has provided sufficient grace for all men unto salvation.

Mans failure to resist sin is mans failure, judas failure to resist sin is his failure.

No body is excused from sin under the pretext of having "insufficient grace".

shdemidemi: If I may ask, what is the essence of grace, could it be to help us live holy lives or a gift unto salvation?

both.

shdemidemi: John 17
12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

If judas suddenly becomes the son of perdition, what scripture could Jesus have been referring to?

the son of perdition who fulfills scriptures is judas, the scripture he fulfils is ps 41:9

shdemidemi: No, asides Where Matthais was picked as a disciple, we heard nothing about him in scripture. God picked judas, He made no mistake picking him, he couldn't have.

first according to the scriptures matthias was with the apostles when the lord was amongst them, from the baptism to the asension. (act 1:21 follows) he wasn't a JJC.
Secondly i didn't say he made a mistake i simply repeated the words of Christ, that it was better he wasn't born, that he is the son of perdition who chose to be lost.

striktlymi: Jesus and the Jews who existed first?

this is just a big door to sematics.

alentyno: Its not a question of sum1 making up his mind here. Its all about seeing sumtin1 white and not calling it black and most importantly WANTING TO HAVE A DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF ONES FAITH. Sometimes its good to express yourself instead of doubting in silence and also seeking to address some pressing issues of my faith
Thanks to you and italo even if I wasn't convinced, I learnt some few things along the line of our discourse. God bless.

i have no problem with someone seeking a better understanding, i have no problems with someone who has questions.

Unfortunately, you didn't exactly come as seeking a deeper understanding, instead you were making well defined statements like "90 percent cooked up dogma". Catholicism isn't new, nor her teaching, they are well articulated and well developed. If you wish a have i deeper understanding then i think you should study futher.

Peace.

striktlymi: Acceptance of Sacred scriptures or the way people choose to interpret it does not really matter as regards who lay claim to it. The very essence of Sacred scriptures is God's word which took flesh in Christ.

Just as no single group or individual can claim 'ownership' of the Person of Christ, so too can they claim 'ownership' of Sacred scriptures. To claim 'ownership' of Sacred scriptures is tantamount to claiming 'ownership' of Christ.

The Gospel and by extension the whole of Sacred scriptures is meant for the entire world and not just the 'elect'. If it's audience was the 'elect' then it would make very little meaning for Christ to instruct his Apostles to go into the world to proclaim the Good News.

Going to the Gentiles to proclaim Christ would have been a facade. Recall that the Good News was meant first for the Jews then the world. So I strongly disagree with you when you implied that Sacred scriptures was written and addressed to the 'Church'.

actually Jesus is a jew,

"they are Isrealites, and to them belong the sonship and the glory, the covenant, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises, and to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race according to the flesh is the Christ, God who is over all blest forever amen" rm 9:4,5.

So yes, Jesus is a jew, he is from isreal and he is even sent first to the isrealites....and it given to the whole world for their salvation.

In the same vein the bible is a catholic book, written by the founders of catholicism, compiled by the church through the workin of God and addressed first and foremost to the church, from it riches the whole world continues to draw good things.

striktlymi: True!
But the question we should ask is whether Jesus was making reference to the Earthly life of Judas or the life after. Jesus called him the son of perdition which could mean one doomed for eternal damnation or a destructive end.

If we extend the meaning to life eternal, then I may be obliged to hold that Judas is surely in Hell but given that Judas took his life as a result of guilt for the wrong he did such that he was blind to the infinite mercies of God; it may be argued that he probably repented at the point the suicide was in progress.

Surely, he was not happy with what he dd to Jesus. A true son of perdition (like the Anti Christ) would be elated to do a wrong of that magnitude. Judas was not; which may indicate that the perdition talked about may just be related to just his Earthly life.

i beg to differ, the one who was lost, the son of perdition, who it would have been better he wasn't born, that doesn't sound like a life that ended in salvation. If i messed up big time and fooled myself and repented at the ended then i couldn't be described as "it would have been better he wasn't born". I would be like the good thief who managed to steal the kingdom of God with his last acts.

If judas did repent then he is a happy man the words of Jesus would mean little.

Also, it could be argued that Judas never had sufficient grace to overcome the temptation that was before him, unlike Peter who had the Master intercede directly on his behalf. If one's grace is not sufficient, that individual cannot be accused of a grave sin.

hmmm...i do not believe that God ever gives insufficient grace, in essence i think it is doctrinally flawed to even believe in an insufficient grace. God GIVES SUFFICIENT GRACE TO ALL MEN. God isn't the reason why one didn't resist temptation, grace is always sufficient, the only question is, is it efficient?

Put simply anyone who willingly sins gravely has commited mortal sin, no be God fault.

shdemidemi: I don't think Jesus lost any of the disciples.. He couldn't have. If God is the one who works in believers to choose to believe, I don't think it is in the hands of man to de-save or refuse to heed. The bible says 'in the days of God's power, His people shall be willing', when God calls everything within you responds to that call.

John 15:16
16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

when i said Judas was lost i wasn't trying to be smart i was alluding to the words of Jesus.

"while i was with them, I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me; I guarded them and none of them is lost [b]but the son of perdition, that the scriptures might be fulfilled" Jn 17;12

those where the words of Christ, none was lost BUT, he who chose to be lost, the son of pedition.


From the context, judas is as lost as lost can be.

shdemidemi: I don't think Jesus meant eternal damnation by saying 'good were it for judas if he was never born', it could have meant the shame and the manner at which judas took his own life. If Jesus was referring to judas' salvation, He would not say-
Matthew 19
28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Jesus was speaking to the twelve special disciples, judas inclusive.

or i could say he was speaking in prophesy of the twelve with matthais instead of judas.

TheBigUrban2: Catholic ped.ophiles at it again!!
Psychologists and Doctors are to breach confidentiality in the case of murder or possible homicide or harm towards a person. What gives priests the right to keep quiet when minors are abused?

i hope you are aware that lawyer don't breach confidentiality even in cases of serial homicide or even genocide?

The law guiding sacred communication is america absolves it from all madatory reporting, in essence even the law know that much.
The law has a downside, the lady can waive her right to confidentiality and request that the priest answers the questions, ecclesiatical laws on the matter are however absolute, even if the girl waive her right to confidentiality the priest still can't admit he heard anyones confession.

I used to be a catholic.....please, where in the bible is confessions to priests mandatory or regulated? Italo and Ubenedictus, the bible says that laws are made for man and not man made for the laws. I think it was Jesus that said so.

Use your common sense. And please, dont sell the lie that the confession didnt take place.

you don't even know yet if the confession took place so stop assuming i am selling a lie.

Proverbs have harsh words for those who can't keep their mouth shut and those who repeat information told them, and this particular law was made for man, it is man's duty to keep it.

Sarassin: Let us not forget that the Torah consists of the first five books of Moses.
The Jews were taught to Recite key portions of it
The vast majority of early Jews had the scriptures read to them.

let us not forget that Jesus actually read from the prophets, not not some selected portion of the torah as you claim.

striktlymi: Nah!

The Bible (Old and New testaments) is God's gift to mankind. No section of humanity can lay claim to it.

hehehe.


God's gift to mankind you say, i only agree to that insofar as the revelation of God contained therein has the power to transform all of mankind.

I disagree if you say it was necessary written and addressed and accepted by all and sundry, even the scriptures itself says it isn't subject to personal interpretation, the new testament is itself addressed not to the world but to the church.


The whole of humanity truly draws good thing from the scriptures, but it revelation is only meant for all not accepted by all. Only the sheep will hear the voice of the shepherp. Only the church will accept the fullness of it teaching.


In this sense it was truly written and addressed to the church.

SalC: Don't fear for me, I can handle the new Uben.

hehehe


"they laid a snare for my steps,
my soul was bowed down.
They dug a pit in my path
but felt into it themselves"


otito diri nna, na nwa, na mmuo nso.

SalC: Yeah Ubenedictus comes to mind. You really need o pray for him.

what have i done again na!

Syncan: lol, Italo for "free for all" convention? your plans are really that of good and not of evil. LWKM,

my good throught are a reflection of your theological teachings.


Besides dem say u go monastry, which one?

alentyno: *yawns* same old story

that unfortunately isn't a response.


It simply says "i have made up my mind, i don't care if you are telling the truth".


Have a nice day, may God bless you.

JMAN05: 2 Thes 2:3-7

3 Let no one seduce YOU in any manner, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction. 4 He is set in opposition and lifts himself up over everyone who is called “god” or an object of reverence, so that he sits down in the temple of The God, publicly showing himself to be a god. 5 Do YOU not remember that, while I was yet with YOU, I used to tell YOU these things?
6 And so now YOU know the thing that acts as a restraint, with a view to his being revealed in his own due time. 7 True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work; but only till he who is right now acting as a restraint gets to be out of the way.

you didn't even attempt the question. What happened to the church founded by the apostles.

Actually all jews were actually taught to read the torah from infancy.

Jesus didn't learn under the rabbis yet when he appeared in the temple he read the torah and said "this passage is fulfilled before your eyes".

This reading of the torah was supposed to mark the transition to adulthood of a jewish man.

striktlymi: The Bible is by no means a Catholic book in the sense I presume you mean. I have heard so many call Sacred scriptures a document of the Church but this is grossly incorrect.

If we are to go buy your logic we can as well dissociate the Old testament from Catholicism and call it a Jewish book. But we do not do this primarily because Sacred scriptures is of God and belongs to ALL as a result.

the old testament is actually first and foremost a jewish book, written mainly by jews with a jewish audience in mind.

The new testament is actually a christian book, particularly a catholic book, written by the founders of catholicism, compiled by catholic bishop as a means of guidiance for the catholic church. It was addressed to the church.

It truly is a Catholic book.


This not withstanding all may truly gain sure and true knowlegde from it for it contains the revelation of God.

striktlymi: No one can say for sure that Judas is in Hell. It takes more than the act of committing suicide to say that someone has gone to Hell. There are a number of factors we still have to put into consideration. Some of which would be:

1) The level of Grace granted to that individual.
2) The individual's knowledge of what is sinful.
3) The individual's willingness to commit the sin.
4) The sin is one that leads to 'death'.

It is very possible for someone who committed suicide to be truly sorry for the wrong done just before the individual breath's his last. No one, who sincerely call on the Lord with a repentant heart, will suffer the pangs of Hell for all eternity.

the picture Jesus paints of Judas, as the one "who chose to be lost", he who "it is better he was never born". Leave me with almost certainty that Judas actually was lost. He died with his sins intact.

Syncan: Hahaha, you really get better mind for that their convention o. lol.

No be only sambisa.

i learnt those good thoughts from you ofcuz.