₦airaland Forum

Ishilove: O great. He had a long flowing beard!

hehehe, the beard was white, or mayb na bia bia

frosbel: Catholics pray to dead saints, bow before idols, use a Pagan roasry etc, sprinkle holy water, call a mere man Holy Father and his holiness, blaspheme Christ by dare referring to the Pope as the Vicar of Christ when the Holy Spirit is actually Christ's representative in our lives.

The Catholic church stands for blasphemy after blasphemy and is an abomination to GOD.

But how will you know when Catholics do not read their bibles.

d usually arguement from emotion. Frosbel never disappoints.

ijawkid: I would define her actions as idolatry too.....I would never support any act of idolatry....all forms of idolatry are detestable before Yahweh.........

Hugging and greeting her late mums picture is tantamount to ancestral worship and ofcus idolatry.......

Idolatry is idolatry....let the truth be told....walking up to a fake marys statute and bowing to it is nothing but IDOLATRY.....

I just can't understand why catholics would not grasp this lucid scriptural truth....

this is becos u think that worship is a matter of posture. Well you are wrong.

Reyginus: help me with this
https://www.nairaland.com/1104124/problem-catholism-an-introspection

oga reyginus, that thread is so long, i met it towards the end and i doubt anybody would have d time to read to many pages, i actually wanted to answer those questions but for time, i'll advise you open a thread, one thread per topic to re discuss those issues.

italo: Here comes the 'doctrinal dance' that protestants always use to blur the discussion when their arguments are being torn apart... Jumping from one issue to another.

Your first question on this thread was "what is the spiritual significance of a moldy heart" or something like that.

And I asked the same about Elijah's bones (implying that they both have similar spiritual significance)

Then you said:



Implying that you believed a dead man's bones (or flesh) could communicate God's grace and Spirit but there is no longer use for it ("physical acts of divine power" in the new testament.

Paul used "physical acts of divine power" (aprons and handerchiefs) to heal people. Did this happen in the OT or NT?

Even Jesus used "physical acts of divine power" to heal the man born blind.
John 9:6 "After saying this, he spit on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man’s eyes. 7 “Go,” he told him, “wash in the Pool of Siloam” (this word means “Sent”). So the man went and washed, and came home seeing."

Why did he have to use his SALIVA, MUD and the POOL of SILOAM when he could have just willed it and the man would see?

And did this happen in the OT or in the NT?

Stop trying hard to confuse the issue. Let us get this point clear before we move to the issue of "veneration"?

Were "physical acts of divine power" only to be used in the Old Testament and prohibited in the New testament?

YES or NO?

i wont be surprised if he decides to dance with you

italo: I get you.

'It is a sin to kneel before 'a piece of flesh' but it is perfectly okay to kneel before a book.'

I get you but I dont agree.

actually by now i expected them to have brought a bible passage that says "do no bow b4 d dead". If there is no passage to that effect then what d hell are they arguing about?

Boomark: ohw! i was thinking christians actually bowed and venerated to dead bodies or piece of dead meat in history. My heart almost skip. Thanks for the clarification.

you've gat no idea!!!

Pastor Kun: What he actually meant is Historical catholicism.

historical christianity i said, ur protestanism started in d 16th century, u guys have hybrid teachings

ijawkid: Ube so u support the worshipping of dead rotten meat??.....why ona dey fall me hand like this??.....

u do not know d definition of worship, u think worship is posture, i can't discuss with your adamance and ignorance. Go and learn what worship is.

frosbel: Oh Yes, I know SATAN is in the Vatican

unlike you , I have actually been there.

What is it with all the dead mummified bodies holed up in glass tombs , statues all over the place, evil symbols , gold and gold plated items everywhere. There was 0% spirituality to it because God is not there one bit.

In fact when I posted the pictures on Facebook my wife asked me to remove them , they smelled of death and not life.

my dear friend, don't be dumb, you know nothing about me, you don't know where i've been not to talk of where i haven't. Yes the basilicas contain dead body, and that is strange to you becos you know nothing about historic christainity, the early xtians buried their dead in their worship place, the catacombs served as both church and burial ground and other churches where build literally on d remains of the dead.
Atleast learn a little background, next time you tour get a tourist guide to help you.

frosbel: Indeed.

Your POPES and cardinals are full of it.

Martin Luther will explain better.

martin luther and pope francis abi?? hehehehehe

frosbel: This is a straw you will clutch to the end I am sure.

The Father of LIES is SATAN who lives in the Vatican and is leading 1.2 billion precious souls through that snake the Pope to the land of DOOM.

Well this is a war I am prepared to fight despite your tricks.

heheheheheheheheh, am very sure either satan himself or one of his demons will be parading in ur environ, u dont need to go to the vatican to find satan, hehehehehehe

frosbel: ^^^

You only say sorry when you INTENTIONALLY wrote an article to deceive which is what you are implying. I cannot accept this , not in a million years.

Motive is the key word bro, my motive was well intended and I have rectified any anomalies that may have followed.

You are left to clutch at your straws and dig deeper into your slanderous approach, knowing quite well the facts.

Then again, I have exposed so much fallacy and fiction in the Catholic church , such that you and co are left with no other option but to malign my person , which is really what is left for your guys

Sin against the Holy Spirit , take your catholic fear mongering to another planet.

so u mistakenly told a lie, still wait for u to say 'i was wrong i am sorry'

frosbel: ^^^^

Just listened to the actual YouTube video in full and he mentioned Jesus Christ ONCE or so.

The transcript which I originally read from multiple sources omitted this , possibly for brevity , such as HERE and HERE

So we are on the same page.

But to accuse me of pride as you so eagerly did a few pages away, was quite presumptuous and slanderous. I was also presumptuous in my initial assessment.


Albeit, he worships a different Jesus , the Jesus of the Bible does not sanction an iota of the Pagan worship and belief system in the Catholic apostate church.

what i asked for was an apology for a 3 page long thread dat was deceptive

Boomark: The only people i know that worship trees/wood/stone with carvings made by human imaginations are Catholics. The new one in vogue is veneration of dead meat.

I believe one day we might get more diabolical practices you guys hiding from us.

that must be becos u have no knowledge about historical Christianity. i leave u to ur ignorance and i urge italo to do same. there is no gain in d useless banter u and ur likes have initiated

Rossikk: One has to call a spade a spade dude. Your imported religion is responsible for the massacre of hundreds of millions of people in the crusades, inquisitions, and colonial conquests. And has topped that all with the blatant racism of denying those of your colour the leadership of your church for 1,500 years. How about that for ''insults, civility, and lack of respect'' (for you)?

hehehe and the solution is to follow ur gods abi??

Enigma: ^^^ The Roman Catholic church is just another denomination; one with very serious errors and faults.

this is a position i'll love to discuss with you someday. Keep that in mind.

Enigma: I think we should be mindful of the truthful state of all denominations - whether Catholic, Anglican, Evangelical, Pentecostal not to talk of the disgrace that is the "prosperity gospel"! We all have things seriously wrong with us institutionally and of course even as individuals; we all have things wrong with both our doctrines and our practices.

Some may get some things right and others wrong and vice versa for others (if you know what I mean).

In this light, I concentrate my criticisms to very specific things. I would be the first to say that even with the "prosperity gospel" for which one can employ quite harsh words first used in a different but related context in the 1900 as "the vomit of satan", you will find genuinely committed Christians truly trusting in Christ even amidst the morass of what passes for doctrine and practice. Similarly, you will find many other good things coming out of the "prosperity gospel movement" as a whole even though it remains a disgrace and aberration and I will strongly encourage people to flee from it.

Similarly, there are many things seriously wrong with the Roman Catholic Church; it has done many bad bad bad things in its history and is still doing some now; on the other hand the Roman Catholic Church has still contributed immensely to Christianity as a whole. Unquestionably, there are many many many good individual Christians within the Roman Catholic Church and who is to say, without specific knowledge and information, that the new Roman Catholic pope is not a truly devout and thoroughly honourable man?

Luis Palau has long had much respect in the Evangelical Christian community, if he thinks well of the new pope, the least those who do not know anything or much about the pope can do is wait and see!

Anyway, mentioning "our Lord" twice satisfies (or should reasonably satisfy) the "demand" of the fastidious that he should "mention" Jesus (as if mention is all that matters).

@Ubenedictus

A little digression but quite related: I noticed your as ever informed comments on that 'Septuagint' thread and thankfully some of the errors and misinformation were corrected. One thing struck me among all you said i.e. your statement that "i doubt that the matter is black and white". It reminded me of something I said elsewhere: "many issues are far far far more complex than the discussions here; in fact, that is why I keep out of a lot of discussions" https://www.nairaland.com/934799/reasons-why-obama-not-christian/14#11031627

(Sorry I have been 'mischievous' to take advantage of my comments/post on this thread for the indirect reference to the other thread).

while i cant agree with you on the bolded, i think you had many points right.
As for this thread, i think we have reasonably shown d pope mentions Jesus by name once, by title 2ice and by position once, i expect mr(s) frosbel to apologise humbly for given us a dead goat to beat and respectfully end the thread. The guy has derail his own thread and am just imagining, why would someone go that far just to brand d catholic church as bad.
As for d other thread, thanks for the compliments, i believe those topics are complex and should be look at with a level head, on the otherhand am a bit suprised that most christians know next to nothing about how come the texts they claim to be a great authority for doctrine.
Peace

frosbel: and therein lies the greatest deception.

Coming closer to the evangelical position to win them over while holding onto the goddess of Madonna, bowing before the decayed flesh of 'saints', conducting the heretical and totally unscriptural mass , praying to saints and the rest of these truly shocking rituals , is nothing more than deception on a grand scale.

But no surprise here, the institutional church will hand over their allegiance to the Pope, but the faithful few, the little flock and those who choose the narrow way will reject outright any mixture of Christ with Paganism no matter how little.

hehehe, you lack the capacity to be unbaised when talking about d catholic church. Sorry if that sounds harsh but d tactics u are using is d very one used by hitler, it say "never agree there is something good about you opponent/enemy" that is y u cant even agree that pope francis homily was a good one.

Rubyventures: If you want to understand, then read more about the Catholic faith before you start to criticize, I do not understand the faith of other religions so i will not critisise their religion. instead i will ask my questions in such a way as not to offend. I have a friend who is hindu and one of the nicest peson i know, when i ask about the hindu religion this person is always so happy to explain cetain things to me and then i understand why they do certain things. I also have Muslim friends and i do the same, we should learn to tolerate and not antagonise.

There is a vast library of knowledge on the internet go and do your reseach and learn more. Knowledge is power.

yeah, i guess ignorance is a disease.

Rossikk: That's why you are a christian. Because you're a dunce who sits there being discriminated against by his fellow 'christians' on the basis of your race, for a straight 1,500 years, while you play the dumb happy slave with no brain or courage to question anything.

thanks for the insults, lack of respect and civility, just like d gods ur friends advocated.

Alfamann: Straw man. We are talking about his race.

then change d word nationality and put race, the message remain the same.

[quote author=tpia@]I think he's following the former pope to his new position, and you're right about each pope having their own new staff.

The guy in question, however, was also made an archbishop last year.[/quote]no, d guy isnt follow pope benedict to retirement, fr lombadi clarified dat in one of his press conference.

Rossikk: ''We''?

Did you say ''we''?

Sorry but if they cannot get a person who looks like your father to be their pope for the first time in 1,500 years, maybe you should start to reconsider that ''we'' of a term, which you are using to attach yourself.

You are clearly not on their radar, no matter how much ''we'' say ''we'' think ''we'' are.

Ode buruku.

the things that divide! That is my response, i dont need a black or white man to be d next pope, i need a christian, thats all.

CAMEROONPRIDE: what make you think there are more Catholic Latino?

that is a know fact.

The church should represent everybody.
You God is white
Your Jesus/God is white
Your pope is white
Where are you African man/black man?

church no be pdp, there are nobody to represent, no jew or gentiles, black or white. All these are d illusions that divide us, the church is one and the pope is accepted irespective of his nationality.

Even to elect this agents of the devil.
Black smoke means no pope= bad news
White smoke= good news
Smh

hehehe, u are clinging to the unimportant.

Logicboy03: Well, I can agree with some of your points but never on Mother Theresa!

That woman was a fraud who enjoyed suffering of others. Both a philanthropist and a sadist would be found in the poorest areas, however their intentions will be different!

Mother Theresa was an evil B*****. A fraud



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrPjX5_gI1c

or so you think.

striktlymi: LWKMD!!! LB seem like one who would renounce Atheism if someone threatens him with a toy gun I am looking for guys who have demonstrated that the good of humanity is more important than their lives.


#LB na joke o!

hehehe, i cant fit talk oh!

anjoh66: This is an extract from his first homily:
The whole homily can be read here:
http://en.radiovaticana.va/articolo.asp?c=673526

An interessting thing is that this new Pope has strong bounds to the charismatic movement as they themselves testify to here:
http://iccrs.org/en/index.php/blog/comments/habemus_papam_franciscum

This article could also be of interest:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/march-web-only/luis-palau-pope-francis-drinks-mate-evangelicals-bergoglio.html

the luis palau guy seems to have a lot to say about pope francis.
That first homily was a cracker, short, direct, straight to the point. If you are not preaching christ and him crucified then you arent been his disciple. Wow! That was a powerful sermon.

Joagbaje: @OP Christianity is not divided. Multiple church is only for structures . I'd doesn't necessarily mean different doctrines.

hehehe, go ask d mormons vs jehova witness, catholic vs lutherians. You'll find a clear difference in doctrine.

Boomark: Have you seen that there was no place in the bible relics were used. Keeping relics amounts to keeping idols. It is not scriptural. So beware of what those you call church fathers feed you with.

u didnt read d link i provided.

truthislight: There comes a time that we find it difficult to identify which are assumptions and which are facts as it seems.

true ^ talk.
Should he not have had facts or references/sources to back up his claims?

Please, Ubenedictus, do you mind providing the sources for what your are saying?
Should we rather take to the bank all you have said without evidence?
Please oblige InesQor, and by extension other readers.
thanks.

thank God i havent gone too far, i would have been accused of citing a "church father" and dat term is synonymous to liar on nairaland. All what i've said so far can be found on the wikipedia articles.
Thanks.

I reread my comment, it might have sounded harsh, i'm sorry, thanks for the civility.

Pastor AIO: You're quite right. Perhaps you could help to fill in the gaps where I err or I miss stuff out. I also think I was wrong to say that there were no hebrew texts extant at the time of the 2nd century. From what I can tell the Masoretic was created from what Jews called Protomasoretic texts, some of which were in hebrew. So Masoretic was not a reverse translation of the Septuagint back to hebrew. I think their idea was to sidestep the Septuagint completely.

and in all fairness, it is also interesting to note that the early christians(except jerome et al) rejected the masoretic text. Justin in his discussion with typho directly accuses the jew and rabis of tampering te tanack to suite their anti christian teachings, i'll see if i still have d link to that discussion. But it is interesting to note that d greek wasn't that better, there were d aquinle and Text (pardon d spellings and d question mark i'll try to update later.) i doubt the matter was black and white.
In Jerome's discuss with augustine, jerome says even d greek version was tampered by origen.
The whole arguement is quite long and i seem to be forgetting d specifics, i'll refresh and get back.

You're also correct that it was mainly Luther that cut out the deuterocanonical books. The Jews had cut them out of the Masoretic earlier but the first christians to do so were the protestants despite the fact that the apostles in the NT sometimes quote them. I also heard that maccabees was cut out mainly because it gave support to the idea of prayers for the dead which some protestants were not happy with.

i think it is hard to tell what exactly luther had with d deutero books, d guy also had problem with d epistle of james (he calls it "d epistle of straws", james actually said faith alone is dead which if using d literal reading of d text renders luther sola fide suspect). When it comes to d deutero book luther just refuses to give an answer he instead uses d opportunity to insult d roman curia.
I'll talk about these later.