₦airaland Forum

obadiah777: THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH WAS THE BACKBONE OF THE EUROPEAN EMPIRE WHEN SLAVERY STARTED AND THEY HAD TO GET PERMISSION FROM THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. BUT HEY KEEP TOWING YOUR TRACK.YOU DO KNOW YOU ARE IN A DELUSION RIGHT ? ( REVELATION 13 VS 8 ) ( REVELATION 13 VS 14 ) ( 2 THESSALONIANS 2 VS 11 ) . I SUGGEST YOU STUDY THOSE 3 VERSES CAREFULLY AND PONDER ON THEM.

sincerely it seems u are d one deluded if i may use ya words! By the 16th cent d cath church was no longer d "backbone" of europe, becos luther had invented protestanism and some kingdom went with him. The church didnt even rule d kingdoms instead it was usually a mediator and abiter btween rulers! That power she couldnt excercise because some rulers werent catholics! The two nations that had d biggest share of slaves was britian and america and dose nations were protestant. Infact wen it was time to enslave d blacks Rome wasn't consulted at all, and by d time slavery was at its peak it was d same cath. Church that argued against slavery at geneva and issued encyclical against chattel slavery based on race. So my dear on this u err, if i may use ur words!
And again since u cant hold ur slavery stance for long u are jumping to revelations.
Interesting!

obadiah777: BRAH I AM NOT TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU TO LEAVE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. YOU ARE A GROWN AZZ MAN AND CAN MAKE YOUR OWN DECISIONS, ALBEIT BE IT DISASTROUS. YOU GOTTA TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT. KEEP WORSHIPPING THAT EDOMITE WARLOCK CALLED THE POPE. NA U SABI OOOOOO UBE

now it is hard to discuss wit ya wen u had dis attitude on, wen i showed u proof of pope ben reading d bible refused to address ur previous error instead u jumped to slave trade! I just showed u that d same sacrament, baptism is performed in many other churches and if d u claim d cath c sacrament is magic y nt address dat of d anglicans as well, instead of addressing d topic, u jump back to "worshipping edomite warlock". Why are u posting if u dnt want a discussion?? Y are ya jumping frm pillar to post?

obadiah777: LOLZ. NAH THESE AINT NO MYSTERIES. THIS HERE IS REALITY. AT LEAST DID YOUU CHECK THE LINKS ?

yeah, i checked d links

obadiah777: CATHOLIC CHURCH PAINTING THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST >>>> http://www.macquirelatory.com/false%20images%20of%20christ.htm

another conspiracy theory, this doesn't equal proof, can u provide a statement by michelangelo that he painted borgia? Or can u provide proof that alexander ask dan michel paint his son? These are conspiration theory without any backing by fact. Besides that site show how ignorant it was by claiming dat the cath church was advocating d removal of d deuterocanonical books. It seems ur zeal to convict d cc has led u to a lying website. Or u care to xplain how d cath. Church removed the said books of d bible?

UBENEDICTUS, I BELIEVE I ANSWERED ALL YOUR QUESTIONS. SLAVERY, IMAGE OF BEAST, SORCERY ETC

nah! I asked for proof dat d cath c was responsible for d transatlantic slave trade and u gave me a web abt how jews were expeled frm spain. Image of d beast and u gave me a conspiracy theory that says d cc removed d aprocypha, i ask abt socery and u gave me another web that say d sacrament are magical. That means any1 wu is baptised is a magician.
Wow!

obadiah777: WHAT IS THE GATE OF HELL ? SATAN. SO THAT VERSE IS SAYING HE WILL USE PETER TO BUILD THE CHURCH ( MEANING TO MINISTER TO PEOPLE ) AND SATAN WILL NOT PREVAIL OVER IT.

amen, if satan will not prevail against God's assembly, the church so how come u said earlier that God isn't working with any church? Atleast he shuld be working with d elect, whad ya say?

obadiah777: ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SLAVERY http://www.slaverysite.com/Body/morality.htm

hahaha, dis site didnt say d church ordered d enslavement of blacks, so where did u get that? Beside d expulsion of jews from spain and portugal is d work of d kings and queen not d church, d pope didnt order d expulsion.
Please get ur sources right, and next time try to give me original material.

obadiah777: LOL FACT REMAINS IF I PROVED TO YOU THAT WHAT IS PRACTICED BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS SORCERY, YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE IT. http://carm.org/sorcery-roman-catholic






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOSL38c_d6w

the carm website on the other had is a total nonestarter, it is a bag of fairy tale. I'll take one sacrament that even lutherian's believe, baptism, now they say independent of d holiness of d minister, each time by d faith of d church a person is dipped in wata or wata poured on him "in d name of fada son and hspirit" that d grace of baptism is confered wow alleluia, so if by performing d sacrament catholic perform socery then the anglican, lutherian, baptist, etc shuld also b accused of d same, anything short is hypocrisy!
Besides d sacrament dont happen behind d scence at least every week a catholic witness a sacrament.

obadiah777: LOL FACT REMAINS IF I PROVED TO YOU THAT WHAT IS PRACTICED BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS SORCERY, YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE IT. http://carm.org/sorcery-roman-catholic






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOSL38c_d6w

sorry man, my internet subscription expired so days ago and i cant watch youtube on my fone, hope ya nt cooking up some "babylonian mysteries" cos frobel gave me a large dose of dat some month ago.

inurmind: We are talking of two different things and u know it.
This is not aout him controlling anybody but about him preventing evil.
If god saw so much evil ahead of some things, like the devil's temptation then why did he not prevent the devil from tempting eve. Mind u he is not controlling anybody, just protecting them.

how is he to prevent d devil without controlling d devil? How is he to stop d fall of eve without controlling eve. The fact that d factor in play are free willed mean God isn't suppose to control them.

Enigma: This is all I can be bothered with in that post.

Spite and bitterness from me? Keep deceiving yourself!

You forget your following me over quite a number of different threads even when I tried to ignore your bitchiness?

Nah, I don't harbour any spite and bitterness towards you. Remember this that I said on another occasion when you showed your colours, well it still stands: https://www.nairaland.com/934799/reasons-why-obama-not-christian/14#11031081

now calm down every one no need to lose ur heads yet!
Though seriously i've gat to admit i know scholars including pope ben who translate jn1:1 as "in d beginning was reason, and reason was with God and reason was God". So yeah, logos can be reason, or word, personally i prefer reason but that not withstanding i think this is all red erring, where logos is reason and thought and word, does not affect d meaning of d passage what does is "was a god" vs "was God" and few so far has addressed the point.
Enigma pointed to ignatuis as clearly showing how jn1:1 is understood and translated, ignatuis also speaks and understands greek, wha'd yall say to that? Shuld ignatuis be ignored simply because we don't like d early xtians or is he worth considering?

Enigma: I agree!!!! My own is to try with all best efforts using spiritual and intellectual faculties available to understand what Scripture is trying to communicate.

Therefore if anyone has evidence that the translation of John 1:1 as "the Word was God" is because of doctrinal bias, let them table it!

So far we have seen NONE --- beyond mere assertion!




And many people acting with honesty, integrity, NO doctrinal bias and with enormous skill in Greek conclude that "the Word was God" is the appropriate translation of John 1:1.

Let me give you just a little demonstration: the apostle John wrote John 1:1. One of that very apostle's own students is said to be Ignatius. Ignatius worked with the original Greek; he never knew of any translation into English and such like. This very Ignatius, student of apostle John the author of John 1:1 said,

Bear in mind his use of "God the Word" in addition to "the Word was God"!

i think this is futile!! Truthislight won't agree with ignatuis, did u forget solo scriptura? Truth thinks doctrines were corupted and i won't be suprised that any1 wu contradicts truthis would be regarded as one of d corrupter of doctrines!

Pastor AIO: That would be quite impossible. Everybody has a perspective, an angle they are coming from.














That would be quite impossible. Everybody has a perspective, an angle they are coming from.

amen, the early xtians wu believed Jesus is God will translate the word was God, d jw may prefer "d word was god". I think to topic under discussion is the article "a" used by d nwt, hope i got it right, so i think it is time for us to bring the criterias that proves or disproves d article "a".

Kay 17: The Catholic Church vs Galileo is an example.

dis is like saying GEJ vs president of nigeria. Galileo was a catholic, it would sound like a joke wen u claim religion vs science and u are bringing a case where both parties were religious!

advocate666: You make sound like the pope putting galileo in prison was a service to science.

actually d pope wasn't in charge of galileo's trial so it is false to say d pope put galileo in prison. And yeah it put some icing on d cake, after galileo another person/s with better instruments did d proving. Probably if galileo wasnt challenged his findings would have remain hypothesis 4 a long time.

advocate666: You make sound like the pope putting galileo in prison was a service to science.

actually d pope wasn't in charge of galileo's trial so it is false to say d pope put galileo in prison.

inurmind: I can't imagine seeing the future, being a hundred percent sure that saintvc would betray me by selling off my car, and still foolishly trust him with it.Only for him to sell it off and I start regretting.
It makes absolutely no sense.

if u dash (give generously) saintvc ur car, it would be wrong to force him to not to use d car because u know he may crash wit it.

[quote author=Atheist:-D]^^^^

It makes perfect sense.

God saw it and had no means to change the future.[/quote]u may be closer to d truth than u know.

inurmind: Freewill has nothing to do with this. The main thing is that he saw evil and unneccessary suffering coming but he still went after it. I say unneccessary becos a loving and wise being would try his best to prevent evil from taking place.

If u see a raging fire ahead of u would u still follow that path?

It seems ur god was interested in watching some entertaining drama series from earth.
Being around nothing but darkness must have been really boring for him.

so u mean God shuld have remote controlled man to make sure man didnt sin? Sorry even God i believe has his own principles.

[quote author=Table Leg ]And where did i say i have a problem with science being challenged?[/quote]d thread reads y religious pipo fight science, it almost makes it sound like challenging science is a disservice to science. Sorry i thought u embraced dat view.

[quote author=Table Leg ]Dont be daft, "fought" was used in a context!
Let me help you, how about "challenged"? Can you relate?[/quote]now it is interesting! What is science? Simply put it is d art of knowing. (nt a complete definition) if it is not challenged then it can't be science, it must be challenged and pass d test be4 it is regarded as fact. So y do u hv a problem wit science been challenged?

Logicboy03: But why did God regret? Could he not see what his false freewill will do?

be careful wen u interprete scriptures! That he regreted doesn't imply he didnt know.

[quote author=Table Leg ]Maybe you need to do more research ... There were and are loads of religious folks who fought science![/quote]is science a human being that can b fought by odas?

lamdec: Please read Matt 8 vs 14, it was stated that Jesus healed Peter's wife mother. So if Peter was the first Pope, he would not be married and also, d first message peter preached, 3000 souls were saved and d bible recorded that they all spoke in Tongues, I am sure your parish is not even up to 3000, so why is it that you catholics believe that only the priest should speak in tongues. If Peter was the first POPE then you people are doing the exact opposite of what APOSTLE Peter stood for.

d cc never said dat on priests can speak in tongues so stop lying! And my bible says "it is gud 4 a man not to touch a woman" so to claim dat because peter was married all shuld do d same unbiblical. Was Jesus married? Was paul married

afam4eva: Men have the authority to forgive but not retain sin. By Men i think the bible was referring to Christians.

Who are the Apostles and who are the priest. Do you know that you have those powers that you accord to some people?

really pls xplain what d bible means wen it says "whatsoever sin u retain are retained"

soccerinfo9ja: Hey science has giving you the comfortable life you have today. Why do religious people talk cheap about most scientific theories that proves that most of life's so called "wonders" are logically explainable and not the work of their "God" ? they go bitter when you tell them that "wonder A" is explainable and its available for everyone to read. No they wont agree instead they start hating on science ? Really?

i dont know any "religious people" that fought science, many scientist were religious people.

inurmind: Yeah it is funny when u think about it.
God who sees the future saw that he would create a race who would get tempted by satan, commit all sort of evil, and who he would regret creating multiple times.

Yet he still goes on to create them, allows the devil tempt them, punishes them for something he could have prevented, and later regrets creating beings he knew he would regret creating?

He sure would make a good business man.

it is called "freewill" God wanted free creatures, it is man's work to chose his master!

truthislight: the bible says that "God has put eternity into human heart" ecclessiates 3:11 NIV.

So, even a beautiful life of 1000yrs cannot satisfy the urge for life that Yahweh put into humans.

Will Yahweh put into human heart something he will not give to them? No

Yahweh is righteouse.

If you are ask to pick a day that you will like to die which day will you pick? (choose a day lets see)

intarasting! Obadiah, wha'd ya say, a 1000yrs old paradise is enuf eternity?

italo: I dey my broda. Hw bodi?

bodi dey inside cloth oh! Hw spirit?

plaetton: Is it about telling a story or about translating the word of god word for word?. If men use their discretion to change words (and therefor,meanings) of the inerrant words of god, then how does it still retain its clarity,authenticity, sanctity and authority?

no meaning was changed! Oga u are on ur own! It seem u are daydreaming. Wake up!!!

Enigma: Yep, and it is nonsense or very poor thinking.

Of course we can have, "In the beginning was mouth and mouth was with God and mouth was a god"

Or you could translate John 1:18 as "No man hath seen a god at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [it]."

hmm... That is seriously repulsive!

Pastor AIO: Truth is True, and remains so. However translations and interpretations are quite flexible, sometimes attractively so and other times repulsively so.

i thought ya said "no one is right no one is wrong", dat doesnt sound like truth is true, but i get ur point!

obadiah777: TRUTHISLIGHT ? YOU WILL LIVE TILL 1000 YEARS IN THE KINGDOM. THATS ENOUGH TIME TO ENJOY ALL THE SUYA AND OFE ONUGBU AND EFO RIRO AND TUWO NDAWA YOU WANT. TRY AND BE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT TIME-SPAN. IT IS FAR BETTER THAN THE AVERAGE OF 80 YEARS WE LIVE NOW

i thought "hades" is thrown into d lake of fire, so there wont be "hades" in the kingdom, or may i ask what kingdom u are talking about?