₦airaland Forum

Freksy: In what sense is Mary the "spouse" of the holy spirit? The scripture has never said so, can you please expatiate on it?

it is a simple metaphor, mary got pregnant thru d power of d holy spirit, if u get someone pregnant then u are her 'spouse'. But it is more than that, a christain also has a love relation with the holy spirit though it does nt involve pregnancy.

Delafruita: do people that fornicate,lie,steal and commit adultery get married?if they do why shouldnt those that commit gayultery

what a dumb comparism marriage is a union of man and woman and by that very definition a man and a man cant be married neither can a woman and a woman. I thought u knew d definition of marriage, clearly u dont

snthesis: Please i need your honest answers related to the picture below:

1. what is your first opinion about the picture?
2. do u think it occurred by chance?
3. what are the odds of rain, wind, thunderstorms, lightning etc -severe weathering, producing the design of this work?
4. do u instantly think it was created by an intelligent designer?
5. which is easier to create, this work or a living cell?

if you have answered the questions above honestly, then please answer just one more
6. Do u still think Atheism/evolution/big bang theory makes sense?

as far as i can tell that is a fine work of art

frosbel: Did I call you a JW or JW Brothers ?

But you have answered my question with 2 more questions

My brother, you guys should read the bible again or use a bible search tool on-line , then come back with the answers and we will continue.

Don't ask me questions when you cannot provide feedback to 2 simple questions.

forsbel you shouldnt argue these issues with them because i just found out that you believe almost dsame thing d Jw believe.

frosbel: Your doctrine is foreign not mine, I follow the bible like the early church led by the apostles, you follow a twisted religion initiated by Emperor Constantine,

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa, you protestants have started carry rumors again uh? Constantine didnt start a religion he was a cathecumen for most of his life and he later recieved baptism on his death bed, hahahaha. I cant believe you were ignorant of that fact. Constatine tried to be a xtain emperor he covened council but never spoke in them. Go and do you research before constatine was born christains already believe in hell as the bible shows and the writtings of d early christains confirms. Your theory started around d 19th and 18th century. Your theory cant be found in d writting of d early christains and you are trying to twist scriptures to support it. It is a pity.

Sorry i havent been on naira land for almost a month [quote author=Mr_Anony]Really? You suddenly don't know which alexander I'm referring to? Wow, but only three posts ago you knew exactly the alexander we were talking about. you said and I quote:[/quote]yeah that was my quote i said alexander may have been a bad pope but after checking the lives of popes i couldnt find the bad alexander that the why i asked you to give me the specific alexander. Is that too hard to do?

Your dubious attempt at amnesia is makes me laugh.
Something that is also interesting is that you say the state and rich roman families could coerce the church in the choice of it's leaders. Wow! I used to be of the opinion that the Holy Spirit directed the choice of Church leaders.
Is this the same church that Peter and other apostles stood before the Sahendrin and said in Acts 5:29 “We ought to obey God rather than men."?

it is the same church, if you happen to read history you will find out that some emperors arrested the pope and put some imposter there. And yet no pope taught a wrong doctrine.

Is this the same church that would never succumb to any man even if they were killed for it?
Yet when I say the church got corrupted along the line, you begin to protest.

that is because the church cant be corrupted, it cant teach wrong doctrine, even if d pope is a sinner worst that peter yet the church cant be corrupted. I thought every good xtain knows that even if there are sinner in d christ church d church cant be corrupted.

So christianity to you synonymous with willful ignorance? Wow! Our ancestors could were not ignorant by their own making so they didn't have the choices we have. I am sorry but I refuse to adhere to your "suck it up" christianity

I cant even see your point. Your ancestors couldnt read, did i say anything about 'wilful igorance'? Why are u puting words in my mouth? They had to accept the testimony of the preachers just like d berean would have to accept d gospel preached by paul, the had to 'suck it up' i.e digest it, even if they couldnt read. What did the ethopian say to philip? He said how can i understand if no on teach me, paul says dat faith comet by hearing. Christ has giving d work of preaching to his apostle and that preaching had been transmitted for 2000yrs in the catholic church.

The qualifier there is the Holy Spirit. Without the Holy Spirit, their command would not have held any water. In other words, "if you want to dispute it, the Holy Spirit must be your backing."

yeah and my bible has shown me that the holyspirit works thru d church, dat christ has given the church d infalliable spirit. That is why the church can say like it did in d council of jerusalem 'it seem good to d holyspirit and to us'. It is d spirit dat guides d church she will never fall into error.

Italo's post is not referenced (yeah I saw it on page 5), neither is yours. I am not making the claim, you are! Please back it up with some references so that I can verify your claim.

you u saw it and decided to continue to ask for it? A simple internet search even wiki will give u reference. Anytime im chance i may give u a link.

OLAADEGBU: Erm . . . Before I go can I ask a couple of kweshuns if that's alright?

"Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." -- Psalm 45:6-7

Believers who have received the report of the Lord can help me out here,

Who is speaking here?

Who was he speaking to?

Who is referred to here as God with a capital "G"?

How many personalities are referred to as God here?

If you know the answer(s) to these please holla.

d fada is speaking and he is speaking to jesus his son, jesus is called God and there are 2 different personalities in dat pasage

OLAADEGBU: Are these good enough reasons for you to jump on their bandwagon?



What else are you at odds with? The doctrine of trinity, the immortality of the soul and Hellfire are the doctrines you share in common with JWs. What do you agree with the Christian doctrine? You definitely are at odds with doctrine of the rapture and you believe in the Replacement theology. Can you name what you consider 'cultist churches' and the reason why you think they qualify as such?



True Christians were not known to burn their fellow Christians at the stake, that was the preserve of the Roman Catholics. Christians would rather pray for their enemies and love those who persecute them.

easy here dear friend calvin was not a catholic, calvin was a protestant d founder of the reform theology that you follow yet he burned those he consider heretics, so i dont see d reason you are talking about d catholic church instead of d protestant reformed church.

frosbel: You are getting yourself into a quagmire, I understand it is difficult to get rid of indoctrination on this subject, but consider the follow verses of scripture :

"Right then the Spirit took control of me, and there in heaven I saw a throne and someone sitting on it. The one who was sitting there sparkled like precious stones of jasper[a] and carnelian. A rainbow that looked like an emerald[c] surrounded the throne." - [b]Revelation 4:2-3

"In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple" - Isaiah 6:1

Revelation 20:11 "Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. Earth and sky fled from his presence, and there was no place for them."

1 Kings 22:19 Micaiah continued, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne with all the host of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left.

Ezekiel 1:26 "Above the expanse over their heads was what looked like a throne of sapphire, and high above on the throne was a figure like that of a man."


So tell me , how many thrones are there ?

No answer


I accept !!


Quit believing in that Pagan doctrine .

this is called cherry picking, you accept what u like and throw d rest away, fosbel it is a shamful thing, the fada has a
throne and so does d son.

frosbel: ^^^

Mate, I asked the question first, stop playing games, I do not answer questions with questions.

If you had asked this simple question, I would have provided a proper response eons ago.

There is ONLY 1 throne throughout scripture.

Let me help you , the one sitting on the throne is our Father became our redeemer , this is a clue.

To show three thrones in heaven is tritheism- the belief in three gods. The idea of three thrones contradicts Scripture, as Revelation 4:2 is clear there is one throne. Also, to say that there is one throne begs the question, who is sitting on the throne?

We see from Scripture that Jesus, our Father and Redeemer, is the one God sitting on the one throne in heaven. There is one throne, and one sitting on the throne- Jesus, the Alpha, Omega, beginning, ending, first, last, who was, is, and is to come, the Almighty.

forsbel d bible shows more than one throne why cant u accept it. The fada has a thone and the son is also sitting on a throne, why cant u accept it.

Enigma: Of what substance is God the Father made such that He would physically sit on a physical throne?




The doctrine of the Trinity is not a "Roman Catholic Church" doctrine! Rather, it is a doctrine of the catholic i.e. the universal church! The doctrine of the Trinity in one form or another or, in other words, the idea of God as Trinity was accepted by Christians long before the inception of the Roman Catholic Church.

See this link that I have referred to a number of times previously: https://www.nairaland.com/497445/trinity-doctrine-invented-council-meeting/2#7181702

or this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_of_the_Church_Fathers

your links quote d church fathers and church councils, the surprising thing is that the church fathers were catholic and the council were also catholic those in attendance were catholic bishops and priest even the pope sent representatives do your home work.

truthislight: @olaadegbu
Bro, am impress for sincerity of purpose.
But i can tell u that u have not scratch the surface yet on this research.

However, u did not bother to ask who drew the conclusion on the research u made? U obviously should note that on an issue like this ones religiouse bias can affect ones conclusion.
Why not try reading 1John 5:6&8 as if 7 does not exist and see the sense u will get?
Then consider the context and see how 7 fit in by urself.

Without leading u, u will notice that the issue is about earth. And Jesus coming to earth. And overcometh the world. 7 seems foreign.

Does the fact that 8 said that three bear witness in heaven means that water and blood are persons?
As vas 6 have it?

Bro, if u read vas 5 then read vas 9 u will see the sense of what happened at Jesus baptism, God himself bearing witness at christ baptism. Even making me to be sceptic of vas 6,7,8. Pls, just have a look.

JW say that Jesus is an archangel. Leader of the angels.

When u hear them out u will know and see the facts they have.

this is the worst thing i have ever heard, you are saying Jesus is and arch angel, where did you hear that! Which bible says so?

truthislight: @olaadegbu
Bro, that statement at 1.joint 5:7
Is a later addition.

There was a time catholic monks took it upon themself to hand copy the bible, thats how that statement found it way into the scriptures. Thats why older manuscript dont contain that statement. Research it.

Say 4th ce.

this is true, when d barbarians attacked rome they distroyed almost all books, the older manuscripts were kept by monks, there was not printing press so for about 1500yrs monks hand copyied the bible translated it and transmitted it, that particular verse came from the copy of erasmus. Erasmus copyied from a version that had an interpretation by the s4de he mistakingly added the interpretation to his work.

OLAADEGBU: I had suggested a link that show your church document that says that Mary is the mother of God and the spouse of the holy Spirit, and I can repeat it here again incase you missed it.

http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/rc126.htm

yes mary is the mother of god d son and 'spouse' of the holy spirit, but never have the catholic church ever said 'mary is d third person of the trinity. Please stop lying 'spouse' and 'third person' are not d same thing.

OLAADEGBU: You say Mary is not the mother of the trinity but is she the mother of God? Remember that God is the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, 3 distinct Persons in one. When the Word stepped out of eternity and came to earth through the vessel of Mary He came as a human being and not as God even though He pre existed as God.

no that is the problem catholic also believe in the hypostatic union which means that when jesus came to earth he didnt just come as a human being he came as both god and man. He was both devine and human, that is why the bible says the word was made flesh and that same word is god. dont divide jesus into two person jesus is one person both divine and human. There are 3 person in one god yet the father is god d son is god and the holy spirit is god

frosbel: God bless brother and good night.

We need to win the lost for Christ with the GOSPEL and not tradition.

friend before you start throwing the tradition cards on me, please note that you are the guy teaching a doctine foriegn to 1900yrs of christainity, i think you are the guy teaching tradition of men. My bible is clear about eternat punishment, just deal with it!

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Question is, considering the kind of man alexander was, did he qualify to be a bishop/pope?[/quote]there are many popes called alexander, you will do well to specify, in the olden days the state could force to church and some popes(some where good some where bad) came that way, the rich roman families could also do the same. So my dear friend it is not black and white. In some cases you just dont have a choice, there were times when the church was coerced by the state. So unless you can point a particular alexander, i think im lost.

So in your world, It is unbelievers who should verify from the scripture while believers should listen to other sinful people and swallow whatever they say? I have heard you.

im very sure your fore father were traditionalist and they certainly couldnt read when they converted, and yes a christain accepted the teaching of the apostles, if they couldnt 'suck it up' and believe then they couldnt be good christains.

So the Holy Spirit now needs a commitee? I hear you again

go and ask the council of Jerusalem in d bible, why didnt the apostles let every xtain hold his own views maybe if they did we would have had 7million denominations. But they didnt they said 'it is good to d holy spirit and to us' that is how my bible tell me that the holyspirit works not personal interpretation.

All sin whatsoever is a stain on the soul. To be born-again and washed by the blood of Christ wipes away[b] all [/b]the stain of sin on your soul not so? To be born again means to be immaculate........anyway please refer me to the text you are speaking from so I can read it in context.

as much as i would love to i think either you can search for that italo post or you may do some research. Im not sure i have the time to show the writtings of the early xtains to someone who doesnt even believe the early xtains.

frosbel: Of course not.

But she was the mother of Jesus in human form, and while he was here on earth.

mary is not the mother of the trinity, she didnt give birth to d father or holy spirit, and even though Jesus existed before mary, mary gave birth to God incarnate, Jesus christ both God and man. She isnt the origin of the divinity, but when she did gave birth she didnt just born a fleshy Jesus, she gave birth to Jesus with both his body and soul and divinity. This is what catholics, orthodox and anglicans mean when they call mary 'mother of God'.

ijawkid: In all the trinity is d most confused doctrine I'v ever percieved.....

Its crazy.....

Y'all shuld remember Jesus words...

""Yahweh our God is 1 God""

Peace every1

the usual ijawkid problem, he doesnt understand yet he critisize. Yahve is one, the is one God, there is one ousia yet in one God there are 3 distinct persons, 3 manisfestation, 3 hypostasis.

ijawkid: Frosbel recently u seem to have evolved into some new bible student with so much thinking....

I like that!!!!!

I have always told ola,and all trinitarians who aren't catholics to simply just be catholics.....

Why??

Because if 1 believes in d trinity dogma he or she can't escape d fact that mary shuld be worshiped.....

The mary worship doctrine and d trinity doctrine are 2 doctrines that must cling together......

They are inseperable.....

the usual ijawkid confusion, you dont even know the difference btw honor and worship. No catholic will ever tell u that he worships mary. Latria is due to God alone, dulia can be given to creatures. Learn before u critisize.

danwo: what Ubenedictus is likely saying, briefly, is that death is a dividing line. that spiritual death is a ceasation of divine favour. the ceasation of divine favour is in effect a separation from God. a separation or withdrawal which is not necessarily a ceasation of existence of the soul. God able to destroy body and soul though.

thank danwo for this clear and precise sumary of my thought, i guess my explanation wasnt very clear though it was clear im my thought, that is why i prefer thinking to expressing. Thanks again

Fosbel i read in one of you post that justice must take it full course and that means they will suffer for some time before they are distroyed. That got me thinking, what is the justice when one offends God? Justice is usually measure against the gravity of offense and the person who is offended, if i slap say italo i will be charged with assault, if i do the same to obama it will be called treason etc. So i thought what is the just punishment when one offends an infinity God, with and infinite love, infinite goodness? I can only think of one answer, if the person is not repentant mercy cant be applied so we will be having infinite justice. Eternal punishment.

frosbel: Now we can all see where this false doctrine started !

Tradition is not TRUTH, only Scripture is.

it seems you didnt read it in the bible where paul tells the christains to hold on to traditions, if tradition isnt truth then why does paul tell christains to hold it?
Food for thought

Ha! This is a 200yrs old problem, you are interpreting death to mean that a soul dies the exact way jehova witness do. I present a food for thought.
When the bible talk about spiritual death or the death of the soul or the soul will perish it doesnt mean that the soul will cease to exist, it means that the soul is not in devine favour. Genesis shows the exact picture chapter 3 verse 3 shows that God threatens adam an eve with death, the truth is God didnt just say 'lest you die' in greek and hebrew bibles it is clearer he repeated the word for death he said 'lest you die die' or 'lest you die the death'. When adam ane eve ate the fruit did they just a immediate physical death the answer is no, so what death did they experience? The bible let us know it was a death in sin, a spiritual death, did their soul just cease to exist as you claim? The answer is a big NO, So what is this death of the spirit about? Verse 14 has the answer, spiritual death is a ceasation of divine favour not a ceasation of existence of the soul. When the scripture are talking of death of the soul you have to be consistent and explain it in line with scripture. Death of the soul is an absence of divine favour not a ceasation of existence.
Peace

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Yes and the bible demands this of every bishop (and consequently every pope) 1Timothy 3:1-7
1 It is a faithful saying: if a man desires the episcopate, he desires a good work.
2 Therefore, it is necessary for a bishop to be beyond reproach, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, gracious, chaste, hospitable, a teacher,
3 not a drunkard, not combative but restrained, not quarrelsome, not covetous;
4 but a man who leads his own house well, having children who are subordinate with all chastity.
5 For if a man does not know how to lead his own house, how will he take care of the Church of God?
6 He must not be a new convert, lest, being elated by pride, he may fall under the sentence of the devil.
7 And it is necessary for him also to have good testimony from those who are outside, so that he may not fall into disrepute and the snare of the devil.

Compare this to the life of some of your historical pope, case in point: a particular Pope Alexander VI amongst others. I am sorry but no matter how much you may try to justify such criminals who do not deserve to be popes, I refuse to be led as sheep by someone who is a sinner like myself when I have the infallible word of God to guide me. I am a follower of Christ and as result a member of Christ's church and not the other way around.[/quote]here you go again!!! Did the bible say that the church leaders will never sin? Even paul says 'that which i dont want to do is what i do'. Scripture never said that those who lead the church will be sinless, scripture instead says that the gate of hell wont prevail and the spirit of truth will guide to church to all truth, alexander was not a good pope, he didnt lead the life a pope was suppose to lead, but never, not even once did alexander proclaim a wrong doctrine, go and check the history of the bad popes the holy spirit made sure that they didnt teach anything. Go ahead and check, just as history has it that alexander didnt behave well, history also has it that he never proclaimed a wrong doctrine, go and check. The spirit has always guided the church even when some popes where sinners.

You do not know this for sure about the Berean christians. You are making it up that they won't question anymore. The point is not if they trusted the gospel. The point is why they trusted the gospel. They didn't just take Paul's word for it but they checked scripture to make sure that what Paul was saying was true. It was because they studied the scripture that they believed Paul and not because the gospel came from Paul's lips. If Paul had said something outside scripture, he simply wouldn't have been believed

As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.11[b] Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.[/b]12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men. Acts 17:10-12.

exactly that is what the bible says, the berean jews examine scripture before they became christians and after examining scripture verse 12 say they became christains, i want you to know that the scripture that they examined wasnt the NT it was the OT. After they believed and become christains they had to trust pauls word to related the gospel, because the OT wasnt the gospel. So when protestants go about shouting 'where is it in the bible?' they are doing what the bereans did before they believed, how can believers act like unbeliever, before they believe they check the OT after they believed they need to trust the gospel paul preached.

The church is not a human institution like Nigeria. The law of God is written in our hearts, The bible says that God does not live in a temple made by human hands.
The bible is the constitution, the Holy Spirit is the Judiciary, popes, bishops, pastors, apostles etc are merely caretakers who must also answer to the Holy Spirit like everyone else.

how does the spirit legislate? The council of Jerusalem tells us: thru the church, because protestants have lost that we have a 30000 big anarchy.

Dude, there is a big difference between saying that a person is sinless and that a person is born without original sin. Once a person is born-again, he is sinless before God i.e. a saint. What you are claiming is that Mary the mother of Jesus was sinless at birth. This is not in my bible, and you have failed to provide clear external proof from the time of the early church.

here is the deal the early church said that original sin is a stain in the soul, and later goes on to say that marry is free from all stain of sin. It is simple, if mary is truly immaculate of all stain as the early christains say then she must he free from original sin.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Yes and the bible demands this of every bishop (and consequently every pope) 1Timothy 3:1-7
1 It is a faithful saying: if a man desires the episcopate, he desires a good work.
2 Therefore, it is necessary for a bishop to be beyond reproach, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, gracious, chaste, hospitable, a teacher,
3 not a drunkard, not combative but restrained, not quarrelsome, not covetous;
4 but a man who leads his own house well, having children who are subordinate with all chastity.
5 For if a man does not know how to lead his own house, how will he take care of the Church of God?
6 He must not be a new convert, lest, being elated by pride, he may fall under the sentence of the devil.
7 And it is necessary for him also to have good testimony from those who are outside, so that he may not fall into disrepute and the snare of the devil.

Compare this to the life of some of your historical pope, case in point: a particular Pope Alexander VI amongst others. I am sorry but no matter how much you may try to justify such criminals who do not deserve to be popes, I refuse to be led as sheep by someone who is a sinner like myself when I have the infallible word of God to guide me. I am a follower of Christ and as result a member of Christ's church and not the other way around.



You do not know this for sure about the Berean christians. You are making it up that they won't question anymore. The point is not if they trusted the gospel. The point is why they trusted the gospel. They didn't just take Paul's word for it but they checked scripture to make sure that what Paul was saying was true. It was because they studied the scripture that they believed Paul and not because the gospel came from Paul's lips. If Paul had said something outside scripture, he simply wouldn't have been believed

As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.11[b] Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.[/b]12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men. Acts 17:10-12.




The church is not a human institution like Nigeria. The law of God is written in our hearts, The bible says that God does not live in a temple made by human hands.
The bible is the constitution, the Holy Spirit is the Judiciary, popes, bishops, pastors, apostles etc are merely caretakers who must also answer to the Holy Spirit like everyone else. These overseers are merely servants who help other christians stand in the faith, they are not moral guides.


Dude, there is a big difference between saying that a person is sinless and that a person is born without original sin. Once a person is born-again, he is sinless before God i.e. a saint. What you are claiming is that Mary the mother of Jesus was sinless at birth. This is not in my bible, and you have failed to provide clear external proof from the time of the early church.[/quote]

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Yes and the bible demands this of every bishop (and consequently every pope) 1Timothy 3:1-7
1 It is a faithful saying: if a man desires the episcopate, he desires a good work.
2 Therefore, it is necessary for a bishop to be beyond reproach, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, gracious, chaste, hospitable, a teacher,
3 not a drunkard, not combative but restrained, not quarrelsome, not covetous;
4 but a man who leads his own house well, having children who are subordinate with all chastity.
5 For if a man does not know how to lead his own house, how will he take care of the Church of God?
6 He must not be a new convert, lest, being elated by pride, he may fall under the sentence of the devil.
7 And it is necessary for him also to have good testimony from those who are outside, so that he may not fall into disrepute and the snare of the devil.

Compare this to the life of some of your historical pope, case in point: a particular Pope Alexander VI amongst others. I am sorry but no matter how much you may try to justify such criminals who do not deserve to be popes, I refuse to be led as sheep by someone who is a sinner like myself when I have the infallible word of God to guide me. I am a follower of Christ and as result a member of Christ's church and not the other way around.[/quote]here you go again!!! Did the bible say that the church leaders will never sin? Even paul says 'that which i dont want to do is what i do'. Scripture never said that those who lead the church will be sinless, scripture instead says that the gate of hell wont prevail and the spirit of truth will guide to church to all truth, alexander was not a good pope, he didnt lead the life a pope was suppose to lead, but never, not even once did alexander proclaim a wrong doctrine, go and check the history of the bad popes the holy spirit made sure that they didnt teach anything. Go ahead and check, just as history has it that alexander didnt behave well, history also has it that he never proclaimed a wrong doctrine, go and check. The spirit has always guided the church even when some popes where sinners.

You do not know this for sure about the Berean christians. You are making it up that they won't question anymore. The point is not if they trusted the gospel. The point is why they trusted the gospel. They didn't just take Paul's word for it but they checked scripture to make sure that what Paul was saying was true. It was because they studied the scripture that they believed Paul and not because the gospel came from Paul's lips. If Paul had said something outside scripture, he simply wouldn't have been believed

As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.11[b] Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.[/b]12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men. Acts 17:10-12.

exactly that is what the bible says, the berean jews examine scripture before they became christians and after examining scripture verse 12 say they became christains, i want you to know that the scripture that they examined wasnt the NT it was the OT. After they believed and become christains they had to trust pauls word to related the gospel, because the OT wasnt the gospel. So when protestants go about shouting 'where is it in the bible?' they are doing what the bereans did before they believed, how can believers act like unbeliever, before they believe they check the OT after they believed they need to trust the gospel paul preached.

The church is not a human institution like Nigeria. The law of God is written in our hearts, The bible says that God does not live in a temple made by human hands.
The bible is the constitution, the Holy Spirit is the Judiciary, popes, bishops, pastors, apostles etc are merely caretakers who must also answer to the Holy Spirit like everyone else.

how does the spirit legislate? The council of Jerusalem tells us: thru the church, because protestants have lost that we have a 30000 big anarchy.

Dude, there is a big difference between saying that a person is sinless and that a person is born without original sin. Once a person is born-again, he is sinless before God i.e. a saint. What you are claiming is that Mary the mother of Jesus was sinless at birth. This is not in my bible, and you have failed to provide clear external proof from the time of the early church.

here is the deal the early church said that original sin is a stain in the soul, and later goes on to say that marry is free from all stain of sin. It is simple, if mary is truly immaculate of all stain as the early christains say then she must he free from original sin.

frosbel: So there are 2 not 3 ?

And why is that , surely with your 3 persons logic we should have 3 right ?

And why is it that all through the bible from the book of the prophets to revelation, we have mention of ONE throne, what happened to the second ONE.

did you miss the passage where the father tells his son 'sit at my right'? Or did you ignore it? Have you read in the bible that Jesus sits at the right hand of the father? Or did you ignore it? Did you read in hebrews when the father tells the son that 'your throne oh God is ...'? Or did you ignore it? The scripture tell us that at the side of the father the son also has a throne. It seem your forte is twisting scripture.

OLAADEGBU: If you truly read that site you will realise that the Jesus you worship is different from the Jesus of the Bible.

this is a big lie, if you want to know what catholic think about christ read the niceae creed. Hey u just cant tell me what i believe, i am the person who knows my faith not some protestant who cant make a reasonable arguement.

Muslims have been deceived as to what the trinity actually means because your church taught Mo that Mary is the third person in trinity, that is, the spouse of the Holy Spirit.

i cant believe that your hatred for the catholic church has also blinded your reasoning capacity. Never ever has the catholic church said that mary was part of the trinity. You are a dispenser of lies, but what can i expect from a protestant who cant see past his hatred. Ola if you want to make a case provide one church document that say 'mary is the third person of the trinity', if you cant then it will just confirm that you are the liar i have started to know you to be. Please if you are a christian stop telling lies.

Read more about this heresy in the link below if you may.

http://www.cuttingedge.org/articles/rc126.htm

as usual your anti catholic site cant understand simple english. 'spouse' is a metaphor used to describe the relationship mary had with the holyspirit, if you are a good christain you should have something like that relationship, execpt that you wont concieve by the spirit.

amor4ce: http://revelationnow.net/2011/12/29/the-dagon-dogon-vatican-connection/

that is one of those fairy tale i hear protestant tell, by the time Jesus was born dogon was long gone, he was no longer worshiped so it is impossible that the catholic church got that cap from dogon. If you want to learn about that cap i believe should you start by doing research and not speculating, that cap was used since around the 4th century by officials in the council of constantinople, that is where it was borrow from. And hey you should also learn the significance of that cap.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]In the same vein you will also agree that nothing stops God from using Mr Anony, and Ubenedictus to proclaim His infallible doctrine.
Now if this is true, this presents a problem because anyone can claim "God said..." How else can I be sure that what they are saying is true if not to test it with scripture?[/quote]i see you point, anyone can claim God said but my bible lets me know that christ promised his church that the gate of hell will not prevail, i distinctly remember that christ said that he will give her the spirit of truth, the council of jerusalem shows me how that spirit guides the church, it shows me how i know what God said. And the simple way of knowing is to ask the church the pillar and bulwark of truth, the way best way of interpreting scripture is to interprete it with the church because the spirit will alway guide the church. The bible remains the word of God but it is clear that it can be twisted to mean anything, an evil spirit can interprete and claim to be the holyspirit this is the reason why christ had a church, this is what happened the the council of Jerusalem. It is the church that interpretes scripture and not the other way around. The guarantee is for the whole church not for individual christains. That is the reason we are have so many denominations because some people cant trust christ promise to keep the spirit in the church instead they trust in their personal ideas. Scripture is very profitable and i make a point of digesting it but i believe all i have taught, talk about, all the church believes are not against scripture, even though almost all the protestant i have met are delusional when it comes to the catholic church.

It will interest you that the Berean Christians did this even in the time of Paul the apostle.

yeah they did it before they became christians not after. After those same bereans will trust the gospel brought to them thru the lips of paul. Those jewish christian who wanted everyone circumcised still had to agree with the council of Jerusalem because the church is the instrument that the holyspirit use in interpreting scripture.

Imagine Nigeria with just a constitution, no judiciary, administrative and legislative arm, the end product will be anarchy that is the exact thing we are having with protestant who reject the church, they have the constitution(bible) but there will never be a general held interpretation because there is no judiciaryetc(church), the result is anarchy with over 30000 heads. Is this what Jesus prayed for when in the gospel of John he said 'may they be one'?

The truth is I don't recall Italo presenting anything that explicitly declares Mary's "immaculate conception" and you don't have to quote Italo, you can quote another reference if there is one you know of but I should be able to go ahead and verify it.

you sound like the guy who wants to find the word 'trinity' in the bible. As far as i can remember the quote provided by italo describes mary as 'immaculate', 'sinless', etc.

buzugee: Ahhhhhh i see where you are coming from Danwo. Well in that case i am interested in the writer and not the author. In which case Timothy is the writer, or at least thats what it says at the back of my KJV

i guess danwo is saying that the words were dictated to timothy, he simply wrote another mans thought.