₦airaland Forum

OLAADEGBU:
Where is Ubenedictus to respond to this?

I JUST DID.

alBHAGDADI:
Look, sin is sin no matter what.

Except you want to show me a verse that say certain sins can't stop one from going to heaven.

Read up 1 jn 5:16,17
sin is sin but not every sin is mortal aka deadly.

magoo10:
is it too much film or too much stories that makes you reason the way you do.
There is a court order stopping that CCT drama today .
Even buhari will not dare give such orders at this critical period.

A federal high court can not order the cct, that order will be ignored and the case will continue. the court of appeal refuse to order a halt.

Seems i left a question here unanswered

Ihedinobi3:
I went to check. It was just you and Ubenedictus then and you are just rehashing the same bad argument you were making then.

I had to go search on nl for the topic and it is funny.

We provided the church fathers direct quote on the topic and you presented a 21 century commentary of events that happened in the 1st 5 centuries. How did you imagine that a 21 century commentator will trump the very people he is commenting on?

I havent read bokenhoter, but u quoted him as saying primacy began in the 4th and 5th century, i immediate provided iraeneus from the 2nd century to show that he is incorrect...then u went about saying he is a catholic priest and historian as though that implies he is never wrong or that make him equal to the church fathers he is commenting on.

I also saw pastoraio there trying to prevent the thread from tumbling into pettiness.

alBHAGDADI:
Yes, he who is saved departs from sin but not totally as his flesh will always tempt him to sin once in a while. The fsCt that he is saved will always differentiate him from unsaved people: he won't wallow in that sin unlike unsaved people who are pigs.

But to say sin, as little as telling lies, will prevent a saved person from heaven is a big heresy, and that is what you Catholics and deceived Pentecostals believe in.

Again stop confusing catholics with protestants. A mistake like a lie unknowingly told does not prevent a saved person from heaven even though he should try and aviod such. But a grave sin knowingly committed with full consent like apostasy, idolatry or even perjury is a denial of our christain calling and those who do such will not inherit the kingdom. That is why catholics differentiate between sins that are committed because of human weakness and those that are a rejection of grace.

Ihedinobi3:
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me...
John 5:39 NASB

They testify about him, i.e divine revelation, but THE truth is a person not a book.
You should know that

IF YOU BELIEVE ALL THAT THEN YOU NEED A DOCTOR

IF I MAKE IT TO THE POLLING BOOTH THAT DAY I AM VOTING KM.
NO TO ATIKU NO TO BUHARI NO TO THOSE WHO FAILED BEFORE

Enigma:


You see yourself. In your post, you abused me; I tried to be friendly and even wished you well; you come back at me with even more abuse. When I hit you now you will start crying and whining. Anyway, I will try and be understanding one more time because I recognise say na so de thing dey pain you reach.

Oh, by the way my posts have been very much in line with the message and intent of the opening post.

Will the Roman Catholic Church allow those Japanese Christians to take part in its "Holy Communion"?

They may be taught more but yes, they will. maybe u didnt read but japan was evangelised and baptised by st francis, we wasnt able to complete training or even ordaining a local clergy b4 persecution killed the missionaries. they are catholics by baptism.

Ihedinobi3:
The Truth is the Bible. I don't offer that to people who don't want it. Even if I didn't mean that, even if I meant that I don't tell the truth of issues to those who don't want to hear it, it does not mean that I lie instead. It can mean that I simply don't talk to them (as I sometimes do with you).

However, the Truth there quite clearly referred to the Bible. And no one has yet successfully accused me of dishonesty around these parts. You, on the other hand, ooze with it.

I thought Jesus is THE Truth and the bible contains God's revelation, now it seems to u the bible is JESUS.

i will address ur posts later. this jumped out

alBHAGDADI:
If you say saved by grace ALONE, then why are you now saying not sinning also plays a part?

What is it that you dont understand? he who has grace departs from sin.

just an addition, the catholic church also believes in grace alone, sola gratia, but we dont believe in one saved always saved. if salvation is a gift then it can be rejected.

LordReed:
LoL! So the god was inspiring religious legend? LMFAO!

Yes dear, both legends poem, stories, parables...all to teach truth. do you think truth can only be presented in the genre used by scientific journals?

vaxx:
Friedmann had already modeled such a universe mathematically in 1922 (of which Lamaitre was unaware) and Einstein was well aware of his equations, but they both failed to give them any physical relevance, they just thought about them as mathematically consistent solutions to General Relativity. .
It is Friedmann who came up with the mathematics model , it is Hubble who did the measurements. And priest Lemaître who put the two together. .Fred Hoyle came up with the name of the theory.

Friedmann was the first to come up the the mathematical model for an expanding universe, lamaitre found the same mathematical model independently, lamaitre was also the first to discover what we nnw call hubbles law and he first estimated the lamaitre-hubbles constant.

lamaitre DID NOT PUT THE TWO TOGETHER, he was totally independemt of friedmann which means he came to those conclusions on own, lamaitre also discovered the hubbles law and estimated the constant before hubble

Ihedinobi3:
Maybe one day I'll trust you enough to believe every single thing you say without question. But today is not that day.

I never asked you to believe everything I said, but I am happy to challenge you to make research on each point I have made so far. Both on the masoretic text and the development of the bible.

I could provide the material myself but u clearly said you don't want that. So what we have here is simple, you dont agree, you are not willing to look at anything that shows you've gat it wrong.

I also believe no means no, even if she offed your clothes by herself, the moment she says stop or no or calls ur attention urgently simply freeze and ask her eh? to make sure u heard right, get up, wear ur clothes and get out of the room.

This happened to me years ago and i still thank God for the self control, then i remembered i wasnt supposed to even be in that situation.

no means no, oga always control urself.

vaxx:
Not true, A Russian mathematician Friedmann should desrve the credit. He was the one who took Einstein’s general relativity and determined there were multiple solutions for relativity and that they included an expanding universe..

Einestein recognised him but his works was not widely recognized due to Russia civil war and sudden death.

Go back and read up on rev Georges Lamaitre. He proposed the big bang theory, HE called it 'hypothesis of the primival atom'. friedmann worked in that area of science and came to many of the conclusions of georges but he DID NOT propose any theory. they worked independent of each other.

Dantedasz:
Oh...it is no longer written under the inspiration of God??
Or some parts are inspired and some parts are not inspired??
Make up your mind.

It is all inspired, but there are different genres. I wont interprete a poem the same as a history book nor a religious legend. Different genres must be interpreted differently. Inspiration means God used the talent of men to transmit his truth.

budaatum:
There are very many out there who rule that the bang and evolution disputes Christian theology rightly understood. And i never said it disputed intelligent design.

The Pope did indeed imply an intelligent designer. It is still a huge step forward all the same, theistically speaking, and the Pope spoke to all. Or at least, everybody heard it.

It may be a big step for protestants but not for catholics.

Pope paul vi i believe okayed the big bang from the begining, in fact the theory was developed by a catholic priest, it was received favourably in catholic theology and both pope john paul ii and benedict xvi said similar things about it. million of catholics hold to both the bang, evolution and intelligent design with the approval of the church.

This isnt new in any sense, certainly not for catholics.

unfortunately the article you quoted seem to think that is anti intelligent design.

budaatum:
Here's it is complete. Please edit your op so it's included. Ta!

How does that dispute intelligent design, infact he implied intelligent design that a creator was behind it all.
I dont know if the writer is ignorant or malicious but many catholics do hold both the big bang, theistic evolution and naturally intelligent design. The church has long ruled that neither the bang nor evolution disputes christian theology rightly understood.

Dantedasz:
What about the story of Noah and his floating zoo?
Or the man living in a belly of a fish?
Or the ridiculous story of the Tower of Babel and God confusing language because the Tower was reaching heaven?
I guess God hasn't heard of the Burj Khalifa or the Trump towers. He needs to come down and confuse language a bit more.

and somehow all you educated folks forgot that the bible is a library of book with different genre, so poetry, others myth and lengends, all portraying religious truths.

Martinez19:
How man times will I correct you on this issue? Even in historic abuse cases, it's still innocent until proven guilty as those with history of sexual crime can still be falsely accused. My sister can wake up one morning and decide to say that she was raped by Bill Cosby, should you believe her because Bill Cosby has a history of sexual assaulting women? IN ALL CASES, THE LEGAL PROTOCOL IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. The fact that some liberal stupid crackhead judges ignored the legal protocol doesn't mean what they did is legal. That's the injustice in the system. It's like telling me that because politicians have looted funds through out history then it is acceptable and legal.

you just don't get it.


The accused is ALWAYS presumed innocent I am not debating that, but the evidence required for historic abuse cases is totally different from what is required in a recent abuse case.

Testimony of a trusted witness including the accused is considered sufficient evidence. The burden of proof is usually different and there are plans in many western countries to still lessen the burden .




Child sexual abuse criminal court cases from a 12-month period were reviewed to determine the frequency and significance of physical evidence in legally "proven" felony cases with penetration. One hundred fifteen consecutive cases were reviewed, and 87 (76%) had resulted in conviction of the perpetrator on felony charges. Charges of vaginal rape were made in 88 cases, and oral and/or anal sodomy in 67 cases. Physical evidence was present in only 23% of all cases that resulted in felony convictions. Felony convictions were obtained in 67 (79%) of 85 cases without physical evidence and in only 20 (67%) of 30 cases with physical evidence. Eight of the 10 cases without physical evidence that did not result in conviction involved victims younger than 7 years of age. Cases involving the youngest victims had a significantly lower conviction rate (12 of 23), despite a very high frequency (13 of 23) of physical evidence (P less than .0005). Physical evidence was neither predictive nor essential for conviction. Successful prosecution, particularly in cases involving the youngest victims, depended on the quality of the verbal evidence and the effectiveness of the child victim's testimony.
googleweblight.com/i?u=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/1881730&hl=en-NG



As you can see physical proof is not necessary, very few of such cases involved physical proof

alBHAGDADI:
Those books deny Jesus, that's why we reject them.

It is clear you haven't read those books, they don't deny Jesus. They prophesy about him now read up.


Wisdom 2:12-20

12: "Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. 13: He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. 14: He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; 15: the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. 16: We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father. 17: Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; 18: for if the righteous man is God's son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. 19: Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. 20: Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected."

alBHAGDADI:
The Greek you quoted is from the corrupt versions which these modern Bible translations were gotten from.

even the manuscript that the KJV used came from the Catholic church. Textus receptus


The series originated with the first printed Greek New Testament, published in 1516—a work undertaken in Basel by the Dutch Catholic scholar, priest and humanist Desiderius Erasmus




so you are advocating a Bible translated from the textus receptus of the "who're of Babylon " abi?

Martinez19:
A man spent 6 years behind bars for a rape he never commited after a girl falsely accused him and there were no evidences to back up her claims. Of course, the judge in charge of that case had no evidence and went emotional but that doesn't mean that what the judge did was legal. The legal protocol is to assume the accused innocent until proven guilty. The fact some judges are corrupt and emotional doesn't mean what they did was legal. Go to anywhere and ask, the legal protocol demands that the accused be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

the accused is always presumed innocent even in those cases, in historic abuse cases the word of mouth testimony of a supposed trustworthy victim is considered evidence and if a jury disbelieves the accused then he is going to jail.


Read up on historic abuse cases in America

Hoodbilonia:
its a secret cult
whr they lock everywhr
windows
doors
everywhr shut and they condition them say no bible allowed
dats a coven with massive love for idols
idols everywhr in catholic church
broke out frm catholic in 2007
useless place whr they sleep around and do all manner of evil

oga stop lying, windows and door are not closed in the catholic church, the bible is always there.
stop lying u were never a catholic.

SamzackD:
In my opinion its because of the history the Catholic church has, it has existed looong before other sects of Christianity, it has existed during the time of witchcraft, vampires and satanism, it was the Catholic church that banned the practice of witchcraft and the worship of the devil called 'Satanism' so its only fitting that they'd be used when it comes to horror,

the rich history of the Catholic church makes it better at performing most rituals that cannot be performed by other sects, rituals like exorcism that can only be performed by an ordained priest.

and also LATIN. The rituals don’t sound anywhere near so impressive in English as they do in Latin, especially when chanted in plainsong.



Try reading it aloud in a commanding voice and you’ll see what I mean.


P.S: the writers and directors of those movies are mostly roman Catholic.

I have to agree with this. it is more dramatic.

Martinez19:
No, it still needs evidence. I can just wake up and say that a former rapist raped my sister where as he didn't. The fact that certain courts woefully failed doesn't mean that others should follow suit.

not really dear,

you can follow up the trial of historic abuse cases in America for the last 10 years, there is no need for physical evidence, the words of the accuser, and whoever doesn't like the accused character, are sufficient as evidence so far they don't contradict themselves. If the court believe they are trustworthy then the accused is finished. Take a look at the cases against catholic priests.

openmine:
My point still stands!
Unless you are saying you dont trust the legal system to do what is required which is rather unfortunate!
The instance i have raised is just little compared to what many have faced for false accusations and R.kelly is no exception to that unless you have substantial evidence to prove otherwise!

Question:Do you have any other evidence aside the testimony of the accuser against R kelly?
If you don't have any,i urge you to take a sit as an observer and keep a neutral stance!

You don't expect the court to give a verdict based on hearsay or confession from just any one based on emotions....If that happens,then no man is safe in this world!

Let the court,despite the trust deficiency you have for them,do what they were appointed to do...we are not in a stone age where people are declared guilty by just mere accusations or speculations from anyone!

in cases of historic abuse the court doesn't need evidence for conviction, word of mouth alone is enough

Martinez19:
So you are saying that we should just believe the women? You are still emotional and writing trash. What concerns me with double standard people? Didn't I say that the court ASSUMES an accused innocent until proven guilty? Fail judicial system or not, every accused is to be assumed innocent until proven guilty? Mtewwwww.

#innocentuntilprovenguilty

what I learned about such cases it that it is usually a case of my word against yours, there is no need for proof, if the court believe the victims then the accused will go to jail. If they believe the accused then he is free.

A similar thing happened with Catholic priests in America, if the court believe the alleged victims then it is all over, they don't need proof.

budaatum:
You guys just about blow my mind with this thread!
Cc Martinez19

nothing particularly special here oga. It is old news that the bible we are holding today developed over several centuries.

PaChukwudi44:
how exactly did you get tis ridiculous conclusion bro?

It is truly ridiculous because the apostle were happy to use the greek even when it differed considerable from the hebrew! In fact they used those differences to emphasize christian theology