₦airaland Forum

Ferisidowu:
I see, I'm the one you said doesn't know who he accusse ryt lolz you even said "as usual" well have it your way..

thanks God bless

you have a right and a reason to be displeased but this isn't the first time I come across Protestants making accusations about issues they are misinformed about like claiming the council of Trent had a hand in abusing indulgence.


it is a false accusation based on either misinformation or ignorance or a rash decision to criticise.

5solas:
True, the Council of Orange was Christian and condemned Pelagianism. That of Trent on the other hand was unchristian having airtel its goal the erosion of the gains of the Reformation. It is also in conflict with that of Orange.

would you like to see how Calvin went and taught heresy already condemned by the "Christian" council of Orange 1000 years earlier?

besides do you know which Pope ratified the council of Orange since you think it was Christian but the Catholic Church isn't?

how come Orange ratified by a Pope is Christian but Trent isn't? double standards?

5solas:
Unfortunately , usually when Calvin is attacked, it is the Reformed Faith and the Reformers that are the targets. He was in accord with other Reformers in those doctrines which are now branded as 'Calvinistic'.

not really, reformed theology is different from Lutheran theology, both have their own heresy but they don't agree in many things, Luther didn't teach predestination to sin...Calvin did. you need to read up on your Reformation.


in fact Luther and Calvin disagree on many things so too Zwingli, so attacking Calvin's heresy, doesn't necessary affect the entire Reformation, the entire Reformation isn't Calvinist.

5solas:
True, the Council of Orange was Christian and condemned Pelagianism. That of Trent on the other hand was unchristian having airtel its goal the erosion of the gains of the Reformation. It is also in conflict with that of Orange.

actually the council of Orange is in complete agreement with council of Trent, the Catholic Church doesn't change dogma.

just as Orange condemned pelagianism as heresy so too the council of Trent condemned the heresy in the Reformation.

are you even aware that the council of Orange condemned double predestination the heresy that Calvin dug up? are you aware Orange also condemned irresistible Grace another heresy Calvin dug up?

it seems u are again ignorant on this issue, read up what the council of Orange condemned.

PastorAIO:
This is circular. I asked why is it special.

You say because it's inspired

I say is it the only inspired thing.

You say it's inspiration is par excellence.

Is that a special kind of inspiration separate from , say, the inspiration that led men to say that god is a trinity?

I agree, it is circular.

allow me to respond later, if I see a non circular way, I'll use that.

Nodogragra4me:
Is your church wrong about the first stigmata. Yes or no?

did my Church tell you it kept record of every stigmata for all times?

PastorAIO:
Is it the only inspired thing in this whole world? That's my point.

nope, but for the Christian faith, it is the inspired text par excellence.

Nodogragra4me:
A priest ordained by your church 'woke up everyday day knowing his unworthines'


What kind of work did your church recommend? The work of defrauding the poor in the name if paying for indulgence and helping their family members get out purgatory.


Between his teaching of faith alone and the one that recommends paying for indulgences which is better?

he had scruples, you can Google what that means, he was told God loves him and Grace was sufficient but he felt he wasn't alright so he manufactured sola fide to sooth himself.

nobody asked him to preach indulgence... that wasn't his job, but of course he chose that as the excuse to spread his heresy.

indulgence is much better than faith alone, indulgence encourage the forgiven sinner to do good works, under faith alone Luther taught his disciples to sin boldly because even if they commit 100 adultery everyday it won't affect their salvation.

that is a damnable heresy encouraging people to sin.

Ferisidowu:
Lolz I'll only accept that those doctrines are wrong if only I can get a Bible based counter argument if not .... Don't talk to me about this again.... Is it those fools who sell indulgence that will tell me what right or wrong?.. blind leaders of the blind?

actually the council didn't sell indulgence infact it condemned all those who misconstrued the teaching on indulgence and tried to make it look like a transaction.

it seem as usual you are ignorant of the people you seem to condemn.


since you hint at it, the council actually provided a biblical counter teaching, it reaffirmed the Christian teaching that has always been taught in Christendom...

in presenting it, where will you like me to begin?

5solas:
The Council of Trent was Catholic and against the Reformation. It was a counter reformation as its sum was to nullify all the gains of the Protestant Reformers.

the council of Orange was also a Catholic council against the pelagian heresy, it was counter-pelegianism as its sum and was to nullify the gains of pelagianism

council of nicea was anti- Arianism and countered the Arian heresy to nullify it gains.

council of Jerusalem was anti-judiazer and nullified their gains too.

so also the council of Trent addressed the heresy that arose in the 16th century... that isn't new, since biblical times the Christian Church has been having council against heresy.

5solas:
This is a great post. It is Calvinistic.
You should be bashing Pelagians and Arminians. Not Calvinists!
@Ferisidowu
It is standard reformed teaching that man cannot do good without grace, hence the need for grace.It is the extent of original sin. But again, you are totally on point when you say man cannot do good towards salvation.

I am left with charging anyone who believes it is in man to 'choose' the Pelagian, not even semi Pelagian!

it is a good post,
it is Christian, Calvin merely took a part of the Christian truth and twisted it to the extreme.

MuttleyLaff:
The serious problem I observed, shown in this post, is, the certain quasi-knowledgeability that knows nothing
Furthermore, it is insulting to someone's intelligence, asking that contributors not quote biblical reference to support submitted posts

Though Jesus was God,
He did not think of equality with God, as something to cling to.
Instead, He gave up his divine privileges;
He took the humble position of a servant
and was born as a human being.
And so God appeared on earth, in human form, as Jesus Christ, His Son

God can send Himself, did send Himself to earth, in the form of Jesus Christ
God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time)
Note Jesus didnt correct people that addressed Him, when saying: "My Lord, My God"

Christ is the visible image of the invisible God
What other logical way, effective, reasonable, legal and conventional means, did you expect God to send Himself to earth?

God was not and never was in harm's way, He couldnt handle
Its often said, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself
Something to be done right is exactly what it's all about and so what God did.
This is a matter of the classsic DIY

God looked for someone who could build walls
or stand in the breach in His presence on behalf of the world so that it won't be destroyed, but He found no one
so God is lumbered with, doing a classic Do-It-Yourself by sending Himself

I am sure you're joking that:
"harm and pain was taken off Jesus so Jesus doesn't have to suffer"

This will explain what the bible said and/or is saying
The word translated as "begotten", is the greek word "monogene"
"monogene", means, one and only or one of a kind

"monogene", is a combination of the root words:
"mono" (one or only) and "genos" (of a class or kind)
hence "begotten", in the context, or "monogene" means "the only of its kind"

It occurred also, when similarly used over Isaac,
where and when Isaac was referred to, as only son, even when Abraham already had an older son, Ishmael
Isaac was unique, was one and only or one of a kind son
Unique in the sense that, an impotent man and menopaused woman had a child, the promised son, Isaac (i.e. child in a class of its own)

Again, "begotten" in that context isn’t about procreation or some fantasied sexual intercourse

Facepalm. SMH. Tsk tsk tsk.

Very good question
The need, is for one "silver bullet"
and not million(s) of "silver bullet"
When Jesus, before bowing His head and giving up His spirit said: "It is finished"
The "It is finished" means "now accomplished"
It signifies a sense of finality, the effect of which continues into the present
The task and/or mission is accomplished, hence, there is no need for a million of Jesus Christ

Jesus, is the last Adam, and second man
The first man Adam became a living soul
Whereas, Jesus, the last Adam, became a life-giving spirit

The first man, is of the earth, earthy;
the second man, is from heaven.

Your emasculating wish is granted

Right.
Now there you have it.
"scholarly reply" without quoting biblical reference to support as you wished

PastorAIO, its turn by turn, I read where you and Ubenedictus used emmany and mutty in codes to mention Emmanystone and I,
and I laughed at how I got misconstrued but I will respond when you both, get to the front of the queue

I didn't call u in code, your username is fairly confusing I chose to shorten it.

Thegospelman:
What do you mean by identify with sinners?

I mean as Hebrew say that we have a high priest who chose to identify with us in all things but sin.

PastorAIO:
I still see no reason for the special status given to it. What makes it different from any other book, or any other text? What makes it different from any other artifact that man has made, or from any other natural thing in the world. Does it speak more of God, or better of God, than the stars in the heavens, than the Mountains and the seas, or trees and winds? I would say No!

the special status is because it is inspired, God inspired ancient men to put down for us his love story...God's will to save humanity by giving us his son.

it is that belief that makes the Bible special, it is inspired to reveal God's saving plan and his redeeming love.

Ferisidowu:
Who organized the council of Trent isn't the council a Catholic organization? Besides what the gospel the moment it began? And what did Calvin

who do you think historically organises councils? of course the Church established by Christ just as the early Church did in acts 15.


funny enough the council of Trent wasn't the first time the beliefs that make up Calvinism was condemned..... the entire Christian Church is pretty clear about the new heresy....it was a novum a invented myth

Nodogragra4me:
What did the church do wrong that they were protesting against or they just woke up and felt like running a protest carnival

yes, according to Luther, he woke up every day knowing his unworthiness so he got his Bible and reread Romans, he found the passage that says the righteous shall live by FAITH, from there he decided that a Christian doesn't need work, so far he has Faith, in fact he added faith alone to his translation... since then he began looking for an excuse to spread his heresy...

that is how it began simply because 1 man had a guilty conscience

PrecisionFx:
That make it an occult. .

then every Christian is occult

Nodogragra4me:
So your church was wrong to have omitted Paul as the first person to have been afflicted by the devil. You need to go to Rome and educate your Pope

sorry Paul himself is the guy who tells us he was afflicted, the Church didn't need to repeat it.
2 cor 12:7


And by reason of the exceeding greatness of the
revelations--wherefore, that I should not be exalted
overmuch, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh,
a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not
be exalted overmuch.

Nodogragra4me:
You are speaking from both sides of your mouth. In one breath, you are alleging that Paul suffered the same fate and in another you are not supporting but waiting for a reliable source to confirm the state of the woman.

If we go by your own conclusion of who a stigmata is then the woman is obviously afflicted for what you define stigmata as is Mark. And marks are nothing by scare and not injuries. What the woman has is fresh blood oozing out of her eyes or eyelid.

a mark may be a scar or an injury, ever heard of Brand marks? it isn't specific.

I never claim that the woman had the stigmata... I simply replied people who were keen to demonize her before investigating... so I do not speak from both sides of the mouth.

lastly I never said Paul suffered the same fate, I simply presented a Bible verse with the word stigmata for those who claimed such word isn't in the Bible, I didn't bother to make any such claim

dragon2:
@ MAJORBANKZ
Pray for the Church in Nigeria,and pray for the Pope.The church may bend,she may shudder
but we give thanks to the lord for his promise.'Hell will not prevail over her'.Armed with that Hope,PRAY FOR THE CHURCH.

amen to this

Ferisidowu:
who placed them under anathema?

guess you didn't know

pelagian heresy was immediately confirmed as a new teaching different from the Gospel the moment it began, it was condemned by the council of Carthage and Orange in the 4 th century.

Calvinism was also confirmed as a new teaching different from the Gospel the moment it began, it was condemned by the council of Trent in the 16th century.

MAJORBANKZ:
I have tried to restrain
this impulse within me
for so long but things
seems to get worse.
The Catholic church in
Nigeria is becoming less
catholic than it should
be. Many unliturgical
practices continually
creeps in and
subsequently becomes
the norm. The younger
priest aren't helping
matters. When I was a
kid, then in Ikeja, you
needed no one to tell
you that the holy mass
was the greatest of all
catholic prayers. It was
celebrated then with so
much solemnity that
one could feel the
presence of God and the
whole of Paradise. Even
the gestures of the
priest then during mass
was so solemn such
that one desired to be a
priest. But alackaday, it
is not same today. The
holy mass in the
Catholic church of
Nigeria today is so noisy
and rarely solemn.
Unliturgical practices are
given more priority than
the core Catholic
liturgies. The
sacraments seems to
be secondary to casting
and binding of the devil.
The idea of mental
prayer and meditation is
jettisoned and replaced
with "prayers that
move mountains" and
our young priest even
contribute to this.
Sometimes when I
watch the holy mass in
Eternal word television
network (EWTN), I
wonder if the younger
priest admire the
solemnity of how the
mass is celebrated over
there. In my opinion, no
Catholic priest less than
5 yrs in priesthood
should have a parish.
They should be under
the tutelage of the
older priest and the
monsignors until the
DNA of Catholicism is
completely engraved in
them

pray, join a society in the Church responsible for liturgy, talk to your priest about these concerns and pray again.

the battle is stiff but hell will not prevail

iAudio:
I'm not a Catholic but I can see you have issues with the above.

In my opinion, recited prayers may not have enough power to "move mountains" thus such prayers.

I have listened to some Catholic faithful who left the church for pentecostal say they want a church where they can really pray and not recite.

Most times people recite prayers with little or no concentration, they just talk for talking sake without making sense.

The priests are not left out. Not all priests are spirit filled. Spirit filled priest dont believe in recited prayers.

Lastly, going to church is entirely different from being born again. I know Charismatic members are of the Catholic church. Op, when you become born again, you will change your perception of some church practices.

sorry, recited prayer and spontaneous prayer has the same effect if the person means what he says, what do you think the Psalms are? are they not recited? does that make them powerless... it is your own disposition that is affecting your prayers.

the op was talking about meditative prayer which is the tuning of your mind and spirit to God which some modern priest have failed in teaching their congregation...not the railings of recited prayer you seem misinformed about.

a priest who thinks a prayer is powerless because it is recited needs serious help because he just showed his ignorance of biblical worship and he seriously needs prayers.

been born again or born anew or from above is to be born of water and spirit not some "experience" in which some have decided to claim exclusive rights as though they are now God.

sKeetz:
Read the part in bold.. Its there in black and white unless it means something else entirely. and I dont even have a single tattoo on me, I just hate when you fanatics cherry pick bible verses that suits your moral standing on social issues. Y'all are hypocrites.

lol

he didn't see that... hypocrisy has blinded his eyes

Emmanystone:
The office of the Pope is the office of the false prophet to the Antichrist.

By all means satan must use his agents in all guises to propagate his rebellion.

Here is what YHWH says about Tattoo and if the Pope were a servant of YHWH he'd know to preach against it.

Leviticus 19:27-28
Do not cut the hair on the sides of your head or trim your beard or tattoo yourselves or cut gashes in your body to mourn for the dead. I am the Lord.

Someone shd pls read that verse to the Pope.

lol,

you guys and cherry picking the Bible unto your own confusion.

verse 27 says not to trim your beard or the sides of your head...I am sure you don't obey that passage, yet you are quick to accuse the pope of been a false prophet because of an old testament passage that no sane Christian obeys.

remove the log from your eyes.

daroz:
I don’t know if he is even a Christian .... someone that even prays in the mosque and read the Koran .
Anyway, God knows best , who am I to know ?

funny enough I have read the koran , all my priest friends have the Koran in their personal library... that doesn't stop anyone from been a Christian.

5solas:
This is a great post. It is Calvinistic.
You should be bashing Pelagians and Arminians. Not Calvinists!
@Ferisidowu
It is standard reformed teaching that man cannot do good without grace, hence the need for grace.It is the extent of original sin. But again, you are totally on point when you say man cannot do good towards salvation.

I am left with charging anyone who believes it is in man to 'choose' the Pelagian, not even semi Pelagian!

of course I bash pelagians and arminians, the Church put that belief under anathema 1600 years ago, the Calvinist simply went to the other extreme and were placed under anathema too.

with the prevenient grace of God man can chose that is the Christian teaching unlike the Calvinist teaching that demands regeneration before that choice.

JMAN05:
The article also said..



Telling someone to bring money, to which you grant him a PLENARY indulgence isnt a sale? (If he had asked for a plenary indulgence, without money, will he have granted it?). My Miriam Dictionary must be wrong then.

The money you earn is used to pay you back. You have your percentage. Yet it isn't a sale.

telling someone to give alms to get an indulgence isn't a sale even when part of the alms indemnify the preacher... people still give alms for spiritual benefit even to the alms preacher... that isn't a sale.

if u are unable to give alms, you can pray or do some other good work, those too are indulgenced.

Nodogragra4me:
In Acts of the apostles, the Christians searched the scripture daily. Are you saying that after they were converted that there was no scripture of Matthew, mark, luke and John telling about the Jesus they have accepted as their saviour? That the scripture they searched daily were ' Jewish old testaments'. Even the letters of Paul to ephesians, corinthians, galatians etc were not actual scripture but became so through your church...is it your church that wrote those letters also or they were initially old Jewish testament until your church decided otherwise?

You confine yourself to what you were thought in the seminary. No attempt to enrich yourself... I thought philosophy was supposed to make people think beyond the ordinary, I did it in my 1 year, or una own na stating that jacket philosophy.


If all the scripture of the old testament are Jewish and not Christian testament then Jesus Christ came for the Jews and not everyone because the prophecies concerning his coming were recorded in three old Jewish testament

oga your ignorance won't help you... the scriptures in those days in acts was the old testament, where do you think new converts will get Paul's letters from when they hadn't even been written then, that is why Paul told Timothy about the scriptures he knew from childhood that is the old testament.

you seem to be ignorant of the fact the the old testament was adopted by the Church from the Jewish scriptures.

Nodogragra4me:
What exactly were they protesting against and when they 'later organise their own thing' were they left alone or persecuted?

against Christ's Church...

they formed violent protests that is why they are called Protestants, the state clamped down such, while in places they had support of the rulers they persecuted all who weren't subscribers of their heresy

Nodogragra4me:
This is how that pope almost ruined Christianity by re writing the bible to accommodate Satan's agenda .... .

lol.

no pope rewrote the Bible to accommodate Satan instead the was a revision of the Vulgate done by pope sixtus with several mistranslations, the mistake were found by the Church scholars and he never published.

Nodogragra4me:
In my earlier post concerning sixtus and his Bible, I remember having a sentence that says a copy of that his Bible is at the Oxford library. If it was not published how did that copy get to Oxford.

of course it is there, I earlier told you that sixtus after 18 months of work presented his cardinals with his revision along with the bull he wanted to use in promulgating it, his cardinals prevented him from promulgating it... one of those copies he presented to his cardinals is housed at the Oxford library.