₦airaland Forum

salvation101:
Freeze is teaching the truth? Now let's bring out catholic hypocrisy.
Does the catholic church teach against tithe? Why is it left to be optional. If u don't support tithe, why don't u outrightly condemn it..
All the other means you guys employ to get funds like giving out letters to unbelievers and corrupt individuals so dat dey contribute for you church projects, are such practices biblical?
You say old testament law has been eroded, where dis you get such practices such as burning of insense and many old testament ceremonial practices u indulge in? Who is receiving who here?

the Bible says let everyone give as he has decided in his heart, whether it is 10, 20, 1 or 2% so what ever % you have decided is allowed, that is what the Bible says.


besides I don't even care about churches that make a church law for their members and say they should give tithe... what gets me is when you guys lie and say it is the command of God for Christians and then start heaping curses for those who don't pay. that is just thievery and lying.

we ask people for funds for specific projects, there is nothing sinful there.


incense isn't just an old testament practice, it is part of the heavenly liturgy in heaven according to the book of revelation, it was given to the Jews as a copy of heavenly things, the Christian Church also took it as part of the liturgy in heaven just as revelation says.

Martinez19:
If what you say is true (which I know it isn't), then yahweh is petty as Bleep.

have a nice day

Emmanystone:
Lolzzzz. A Catholic is calling a Christian a liar. Hilarious.

Babylon the Great, the great Harlot shall fall, and great shall be her fall.

a Catholic calling a Protestant a liar, pretty normal...

Protestants and their heresy

jamescross:
was there sex prefall?

as we know it Jesus told them no sex in God's Kingdom

anyway christianity is a religion not founded by Christ Jesus but by gentile men

yes there was sex prefall, be fruitful and multiply, what do you think that means

Hiswordxray:
You are right my dear, sola scriptura didn't solve anything. All it did was divine the Church and made way for even more division. Martin Luther intentions may be pure but the method he was terrible. Like someone once said, "the greatest damage done in history was done with good intentions".

exactly, good intentions horrible method

PastorAIO:
It is actually to be expected. Where they feel they have answers they never fail to present them with bible quotes etc.

But when they are out of their depth they resort to insults and toxicity. In fact that is how you know them. When you say something and their response is a personal insult then everybody can take it for granted that they have nothing with which to answer your argument. That is where the discussion should end for everybody to see their vacuousness.

it is just weird, that's all I'm saying

johnw74:
it's a fact you are a statue worshipper, that's truth,
so where is the name calling, and innacurate and immature rant Here oh lying false accuser:




but you are correct in me being a iconoclast
i certinally do criticize your cherished false worship of statues

God is a iconoclast also:
Lev_26:1 Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God.

we have all seen rc's bow down and kneel down praying before statues of mary
God hates idol worship, and you dictus obviously don't care at all about that

I guess you just happen to read your Bible selectively and interpret it horribly

I may be wrong but I see aio and emmany and mutty speak of religion in its purest idealistic form and anathemize anything that fall under and below and I am almost tempted to ask if any of you guys live out the religion you profess...


in my personal experience and in the experience of those around me it isn't perfect, we fall under often, in fact Catholics make a point of describing Christian life as the personal workspace of the HOLY spirit who constantly re-converts us, remake us and remold us.... in fact the awareness that I am living in Grace isn't the most interesting thing in my Christian life, it is instead that act of falling down on my kneels as God exposes parts of my life and attitudes, behavior and thoughts I have falsely built and leads me to a new path....that is for me one of the best effects of grace.

living below what is perfect has not made me a lesser Christian, it has led me forward it is part of what is genuinely Christian, the Christian is not a perfect product, in my experience he is God's work in progress.

I don't agree with you guys that a Christian doesn't steal, cheat, fornicate or commit sin, cos he does, his benefit is simply the remaking, renewing and converting power of the HOLY spirit. I have never seen the Christian Church as a gathering of the perfect, that is Calvinist, for me it is a hospital for sinners, constantly healing and been healed....

I don't agree with this idea of perfection you guys seem to advocate.

salvation101:
Catholics wants to be seen as the true church even with their extrabiblical practices. Check out the Christian joining forces with freeze to fight the pentecostals, most are catholics(nairaland as a case study).

the Catholic Church is the true and original church from which all others false teachers schism from.

if freeze is speaking the truth why won't Catholics agree? you guys have decided to scare the people of God with terrible teaching just to steal their wealth under false pretense all in the name of old testament laws that have long been eroded.

you guys should repent, if your church needs funds your pastor should say so not hide under an obsolete law to scare people with curses.

ifenes:
Was Jesus married ?

no, how is that relevant?

johnw74:
now even more so with the presence of statue worshiper

however i continue to say God does not lie
and i continue to show up those that twist God's word

that is the name calling you do for kids, I am not moved by inaccurate and immature rant, you only showed yourself to be an iconoclast.

Emmanystone:
You are saying this to still pretend that Catholics don't worship Mary?

Listen, you know it, i know it, and every one who reads his or her Bible who also had been a Catholic knows that Mary is a goddess worshipped by Catholics, deny it all you want, the truth glares at your face.

Catholicism is Hellenism period.

you know you are lying about what Catholics believe, you know your father, the father of lies.

the pastors are just human beings, they too are prone to human weaknesses... talk to him about it or find another pastor.

Abraham isn't about making stupid demands, it was a command that was never going to be carried out, it was a foreshadowing of what God himself will do to show his love for us.

he will give us his son, his only son who he loves, he himself will provide the Lamb, the true sacrifice, it wasn't about Issac is was about Jesus.

see issues settled thousands of years ago.

I don't understand why some people enjoy confusing themselves.

there is no polygamy in Christianity, Jesus has restored marriage to its original prefall state, it was not so in the beginning.

BluntTheApostle:
The keys are symbolic and every true Christian possesses them by their faith in the Son of the living God. The keys served the vestment of power to bind and loose.

"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matthew 16:19)

These keys would later be given to the other disciples as well:

"Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:18)

By virtue of our faith in Christ, all believers now possess these keys of authority.

The keys are no evidence of Peter's leadership.

The Bible has no evidence that Peter was superior to the other Apostles. Peter himself never showed it and none of the Apostles showed it. Paul confirmed that Peter was sent to the circumcised (the Jews) while he (Paul) was sent to us (the Gentiles).

On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised. (Galatians 2:7)

The bulk of Christianity is modeled after the teaching of Paul and if anyone wants to adopt an apostle as the first Pope, I think it ought to be Paul.

Also, when Paul mentioned those whom he felt were the pillars of the Church, he didn't list Peter as the first even though Matthew recorded Peter as one of the first two that Jesus called.

James, Cephas and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised. (Galatians 2:9)

not really.


for a Jew the keys of the kingdom are very specific symbols, that is why only one person is said to be given those keys.

read Isaiah 22:22

… 21 And I will clothe him with your tunic And tie your
sash securely about him. I will entrust him with your
authority, And he will become a father to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.
22 "Then I will set the key of the house of David on
his shoulder, When he opens no one will shut, When
he shuts no one will open. 23 "I will drive him like a
peg in a firm place, And he will become a throne of
glory to his father's house.…


the keys of the kingdom are the symbols of the prime minister in the davidic kingdom... there were 12 ministers in the kingdom, the keys were the symbol of the prime minister the one who ruled in the King's absence. Jesus is the descendant of David, he is the new king, he chose 12 apostles and gave one the keys of His kingdom... that is how peter is the leader.


that is what it means to receive the keys, all the early Christians know this, it is only people who seem ignorant of scriptural symbolism that don't.

shadeyinka:
Yes o!
The great Catholic church is an underground church. Officially, it doesnt exist in Saudi Arabia.

Any church that MUST worship on Sundays must either come early before official Sunday work hours or wait till Evening.

Most churches prefar to worship on Fridays.

Shalom

I'll leave the Sunday issue for now till I can confirm.

cheers

live4dgospel:
Anyway I don't minister confusions and misunderstanding.

no you just minister misinformation

live4dgospel:
I'm sorry, your answer here is wrongly. Why? Because the essence of the dove alighting on the head of Jesus, was for a confirmation to John the Baptist that this Man is the Christ who will take the sin of the world. I mean it is for John to bear witness of the Lamb to the Jews. It has nothing to do with why Jesus was baptized. Even your quotation makes it clear "...this is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit". Jesus Himself said "for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" John the Baptist knew that Jesus needed no baptism even before he baptized Jesus but because Jesus gave him the reason for the baptism "for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness", only then he consented and baptized Him. Remember that Jesus said "for us", which means that both of them were involved in the "fulfill all righteousness". The reason Jesus was baptized, my friend, is for John the Baptist to transfer all the sin of the world to the head of Jesus Christ, so that the righteous requirements of the law might be fulfilled in us. It was through His baptism that Jesus received the sin of the world. Have you ever wondered why Jesus told the woman caught in the very act of adultery "neither do I condemn you"? Whereas the woman was caught in the very act so she really deserved death according to the law. Jesus was able to say that because He has received her sin during baptism, so it was Him who deserved to die for the sin and not the woman, because according to the law the wages of sin death. Let me expand on this point by using the original text in Greek. The phrase “thus it is fitting” in Matthew 3:15 is “ουτως (hutos)” and “πασαν δικαιοσυνην.” in Greek. When Jesus was baptized, He was saying that that “it was for the fulfillment of all the righteousness of God that John the Baptist was to baptize Him and He was to receive this baptism.” This is what is meant by “ουτως (huts)” and “πασαν δικαιοσυνην (pasan dik-ah-yosoo’-nayn)” in the original text. ‘The word “ουτως (hutos),” which is translated as “thus” in English, means “in this way,” “in the most appropriate way,” and “in no other way but this.” The next word “δικαιοσυνην (dik-ah-yos-oo’-nayn)” means “the fairest.” This is not based on my own interpretation, but rather, it is what is actually written in Greek, which is one of the clearest languages.

the Greek say it was fitting and appropriate but it doesn't say anyone transferred sins to Jesus or that an aaronic priest is the priest of the new covenant.

the reason it is fitting is right there in scripture, when coming out of water the spirit descends on him, that fulfills the word of God to John.
secondly by allowing himself the baptism of repentance he identify with sinners and it accounted as a sinner as prophesied by Isaiah 53

HigherEd:
Now you've left Pentecostals to start 'dealing' with Catholics.

fosbel was always anti catholic, she was a heavy anti catholic fundamentalist Protestant, she was researching early Christianity and found out that the Catholic Church was involved in all of it.

so she rejected the belief of the Trinity and Protestantism, that is how he started to attack Protestants... but even before then he was against Catholics.


I am even surprised he found the news late, this happened several months ago, in fact the cardinal was told to go back to Australia and answer for himself, he said he was not guilty and employed a lawyer... he claimed the whole idea was abhorrent to him... still waiting trial.

EMEKUSBOY9:
good day to all.

firstly, i am not here to create war between Protestant churches & Catholic churches, am here to have some knowledge to add to mine which i already have then find out the Truth. without any argument on this, Catholic churches are the oldest among all other churches we have, and that speak a lot interms of integrity, faith, truth..... not just today i have come across such judgement against Catholic churches and just today i went to church a minister of God was giving a testimony about a woman who was sick but after she left her Catholic church she started started seeing the light of God and she started knowing the truth about God. but my questions now is , DOES IT MEAN THERE IS NO GOD IN CATHOLIC CHURCHES? AND DOES IT ALSO MEAN THEY ARE NOT TEACHING THE RIGHT THINGS?.

to my surprise since have been going to Catholic churches and Protestant churches have not had a revered father or bishop insight Protestant churches as weakening.

it is called bad mouthing, people do it to other who are their superior

Emmanystone:
Catholicism is a distinct religion with Mary as her goddess and the Pope as her high priest. She is not a Christian faith.

She is Hellenistic and pretending it is Christian doesn't change that. By her fruits we know her.

Babylon the great, the great harlot. Come out if her or perish with her.

the stupidity of this post becomes glaring when one realises that anyone who believes that Mary is a goddess is considered a heretic and ripe for excommunication in the Catholic Church.


why will you go to such length to accuse Catholics of things that is abhorrent to them and which they condemn? what kind of hatred will make you lie about what another man believe? why will you say they believe the very things they condemn?

you are just a liar and you know your father, the father of lies.

do you simply wish to do your Catholic bashing or are you willing to discuss these your supposed issues?

if you simply wish to bash, have a nice day.

if you are willing to discuss these issues then put them one at a time, quote what Catholics believe about the topic and your condemnation... I'll do my best to clarify each issue.

Emmanystone:
I know you love, but if you indeed have Christ you'd know she didn't lead you to Christ. At least not Jesus Christ of Nazareth, because He said, Come unto me all you who labour and are heavy laden. He didn't say come to me theough anyone.

Gerarahia.

your pastors are allowed to lead people to Christ but it is forbidden for Mary to do so.


what type of stupidity has fallen on Protestant Christianity?

live4dgospel:
Here is your previous comment "the inquisition it self was created to stem
civil unrest and provide a just system, it
began in the 12 century and that is true, its
aim isn't to stop people from reading the
Bible but to make sure the state didn't punish
innocent people for crimes they weren't
guilty of, you can read that up here."

Remember you deceitfully chose to use the word Inquisition instead of Roman Inquisition (unless you mean the same thing). There were of course Inquisitions before 15th century, as i have said earlier the "Roman Inquisition" was a third variety!

A third variety of the Inquisition was the
Roman Inquisition. Alarmed by the spread of
Protestantism and especially by its penetration
into Italy, Pope Paul III in 1542 established in
Rome the Congregation of the Inquisition.
This institution was al so known as the
Roman Inquisition and the Holy Office. Six
cardinals including Carafa constituted the
original inquisition whose powers extended to
the whole Church. The "Holy Office" was
really a new institution related to the
Medieval Inquisition only by vague
precedents. More free from episcopal control
than its predecessor, it also conceived of its
function differently. Some saw its
establishment as an attempt to counter-
balance the severe Spanish Inquisition at a
time when much of Italy was under Spanish
rule. Whereas the medieval Inquisition had
focused on popular misconceptions which
resulted in the disturbance of public order,
the Holy Office was concerned with orthodoxy
of a more academic nature, especially as it
appeared in the writings of theologians. In its
first twelve years, the activities of the Roman
Inquisition were relatively modest and were
restricted almost exclusively to Italy. Cardinal
Carafa became Pope Paul IV in 1555 and
immediately urged a vigorous pursuit of
"suspects." His snare did not exclude bishops
or even cardinals of the Church. Pope Paul IV
carged the congregation to draw up a list of
books which he felt offended faith or morals.
This resulted in the first Index of Forbidden
Books (1559). Although succeeding popes
tempered the zeal of the Roman Inquisition,
many viewed the institution as the cutomary
instrument of papal government used in the
regulation of Church order. This was the
institution that would later put Galileo on
trial."
Excerpts from galileo.rice.edu/lib/student_work/trial96/loftis/overview.html

But Here is also what Wikipedia has to say

The Roman Inquisition began in 1542 as
part of the Catholic Church's Counter-
Reformation against the spread of
Protestantism, but it represented a less
harsh affair than the previously established
Spanish Inquisition. [3] In 1588, [4] Pope
Sixtus V established 15 congregations of the
Roman Curia of which the Supreme Sacred
Congregation of the Roman and Universal
Inquisition was one. In 1908, the
congregation was renamed the Supreme
Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office and
in 1965 it was renamed again and is now
known as the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith .
While the Roman Inquisition was originally
designed to combat the spread of
Protestantism in Italy, the institution
outlived that original purpose and the
system of tribunals lasted until the mid
18th century, when pre-unification Italian
states began to suppress the local
inquisitions, effectively eliminating the
power of the church to prosecute heretical
crimes."

The Roman Inquisition , formally the
Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman
and Universal Inquisition , was a system of
tribunals developed by the Holy See of the
Roman Catholic Church, during the second
half of the 16th century, responsible for
prosecuting individuals accused of a wide
array of crimes relating to religious
doctrine or alternate religious doctrine or
alternate religious beliefs. In the period
after the Medieval Inquisition , it was one
of three different manifestations of the
wider Catholic Inquisition along with the
Spanish Inquisition and Portuguese
Inquisition .
Objectives
Like other iterations of the Inquisition, the
Roman Inquisition was responsible for
prosecuting individuals accused of
committing offenses relating to heresy,
including Protestantism , sorcery ,
immorality , blasphemy , Judaizing and
witchcraft, as well as for censorship of
printed literature. After 1567, with the
execution of Pietro Carnesecchi, an
allegedly leading heretic, the Holy Office
moved to broaden concerns beyond that of
theological matters, such as love magic,
witchcraft, superstitions, and cultural
morality. However, the treatment was more
disciplinary than punitive. [1] The tribunals
of the Roman Inquisition covered most of
the Italian peninsula as well as Malta and
also existed in isolated pockets of papal
jurisdiction in other parts of Europe ,
including Avignon in France . The Roman
Inquisition, though, was considerably more
bureaucratic and focussed on pre-emptive
control in addition to the reactive judicial
prosecution experienced under other
iterations. [2]"

in case you had forgotten, this is your earlier wrote

Where
is it written in the Bible that any one who tries to
find the truth with the Bible on his own should be
executed, as the Inquisition did in the past, if it was
not an attempt to divert the attention of the true
seekers from finding the faults in Catholicism?


you didn't specify which of the inquisitions which the Church judged, the Roman Inquisition wasn't the first and as I said the Inquisition began in the 12century.
wiki says

The Inquisition was a group of institutions within the
government system of the Catholic Church whose aim
was to combat heresy. It started in 12th-century
France to combat religious dissent, in particular the
Cathars and the Waldensians

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition

so when you wrote the Inquisition you only seem ignorant that the Roman Inquisition wasn't the first nor the beginning of the Inquisition.

it still didn't kill millions as you seem to think, it was just and still didn't issue death sentence.

live4dgospel:
Just be quoting me well anywhere you go, I repeat Emperor Constantine made "Roman Catholic" a state religion I never say Christianity! Are you now rejecting the quotes from Wikipedia, remember you have been quoting from it. Because it's now against you. Was it not made clear from the quotations that those guys were tried by Roman Inquisition and executed by them? I will continue to hit your head until you learn how to make an unbiased research.
Here is your previous comment "the inquisition it self was created to stem
civil unrest and provide a just system, it
began in the 12 century and that is true, its
aim isn't to stop people from reading the
Bible but to make sure the state didn't punish
innocent people for crimes they weren't
guilty of, you can read that up here."

Remember you deceitfully chose to use the word Inquisition instead of Roman Inquisition (unless you mean the same thing). There were of course Inquisitions before 15th century, as i have said earlier the "Roman Inquisition" was a third variety!

A third variety of the Inquisition was the
Roman Inquisition. Alarmed by the spread of
Protestantism and especially by its penetration
into Italy, Pope Paul III in 1542 established in
Rome the Congregation of the Inquisition.
This institution was al so known as the
Roman Inquisition and the Holy Office. Six
cardinals including Carafa constituted the
original inquisition whose powers extended to
the whole Church. The "Holy Office" was
really a new institution related to the
Medieval Inquisition only by vague
precedents. More free from episcopal control
than its predecessor, it also conceived of its
function differently. Some saw its
establishment as an attempt to counter-
balance the severe Spanish Inquisition at a
time when much of Italy was under Spanish
rule. Whereas the medieval Inquisition had
focused on popular misconceptions which
resulted in the disturbance of public order,
the Holy Office was concerned with orthodoxy
of a more academic nature, especially as it
appeared in the writings of theologians. In its
first twelve years, the activities of the Roman
Inquisition were relatively modest and were
restricted almost exclusively to Italy. Cardinal
Carafa became Pope Paul IV in 1555 and
immediately urged a vigorous pursuit of
"suspects." His snare did not exclude bishops
or even cardinals of the Church. Pope Paul IV
carged the congregation to draw up a list of
books which he felt offended faith or morals.
This resulted in the first Index of Forbidden
Books (1559). Although succeeding popes
tempered the zeal of the Roman Inquisition,
many viewed the institution as the cutomary
instrument of papal government used in the
regulation of Church order. This was the
institution that would later put Galileo on
trial."
Excerpts from galileo.rice.edu/lib/student_work/trial96/loftis/overview.html

But Here is also what Wikipedia has to say

The Roman Inquisition began in 1542 as
part of the Catholic Church's Counter-
Reformation against the spread of
Protestantism, but it represented a less
harsh affair than the previously established
Spanish Inquisition. [3] In 1588, [4] Pope
Sixtus V established 15 congregations of the
Roman Curia of which the Supreme Sacred
Congregation of the Roman and Universal
Inquisition was one. In 1908, the
congregation was renamed the Supreme
Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office and
in 1965 it was renamed again and is now
known as the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith .
While the Roman Inquisition was originally
designed to combat the spread of
Protestantism in Italy, the institution
outlived that original purpose and the
system of tribunals lasted until the mid
18th century, when pre-unification Italian
states began to suppress the local
inquisitions, effectively eliminating the
power of the church to prosecute heretical
crimes."

The Roman Inquisition , formally the
Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman
and Universal Inquisition , was a system of
tribunals developed by the Holy See of the
Roman Catholic Church, during the second
half of the 16th century, responsible for
prosecuting individuals accused of a wide
array of crimes relating to religious
doctrine or alternate religious doctrine or
alternate religious beliefs. In the period
after the Medieval Inquisition , it was one
of three different manifestations of the
wider Catholic Inquisition along with the
Spanish Inquisition and Portuguese
Inquisition .
Objectives
Like other iterations of the Inquisition, the
Roman Inquisition was responsible for
prosecuting individuals accused of
committing offenses relating to heresy,
including Protestantism , sorcery ,
immorality , blasphemy , Judaizing and
witchcraft, as well as for censorship of
printed literature. After 1567, with the
execution of Pietro Carnesecchi, an
allegedly leading heretic, the Holy Office
moved to broaden concerns beyond that of
theological matters, such as love magic,
witchcraft, superstitions, and cultural
morality. However, the treatment was more
disciplinary than punitive. [1] The tribunals
of the Roman Inquisition covered most of
the Italian peninsula as well as Malta and
also existed in isolated pockets of papal
jurisdiction in other parts of Europe ,
including Avignon in France . The Roman
Inquisition, though, was considerably more
bureaucratic and focussed on pre-emptive
control in addition to the reactive judicial
prosecution experienced under other
iterations. [2]"

Constantine didn't make Roman Catholicism a state religion either, you seem to be largely ignorant about these issues. Constantine only gave freedom to Christians to practice their faith. read up the edict of Milan

you guys are making the thread toxic

live4dgospel:
How long will you be avoiding my questions? Please let me make you understand my question well before I can conclude that you are afraid of answering it. John the Baptist gave the baptism of repentance, and only sinners needed the baptism As it is written "Now John himself was clothed in camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins." (Matthew 3:4-6) But surprisingly, Jesus Christ a sinless Man came to be baptized by John. John was shocked and tried to stop Him from being baptized, as it written "And John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?” But Jesus answered and said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him."(Matthew 3:14-15) John really knew that the baptism he was giving was not for Jesus! What then did Jesus reply with? He said "permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" Why was a sinless Man baptized? Jesus absolutely gave the reason here "for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness" What does He mean by for thus and all righteousness?

I just answered the question,

Jesus had no sin, but his baptism fulfilled the word of God given to John.


And John bore witness saying, “I have
beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out
of heaven, and He remained upon Him. And
I did not recognize Him, but He who sent
me to baptize in water said to me, ‘He upon
whom you see the Spirit descending and
remaining upon Him, this is the one who
baptizes in the Holy Spirit.'” (NASB) John
1:32-33

shadeyinka:
Yes, they do meet unofficially in private residences and personal business premises or the embassies of their respective governments.

hmmm.


let me hold the thought... I imagine the Catholic Church in Saudi is an underground Church... but I'm not too sure of this Friday worship

shadeyinka:
https://www.nordeatrade.com/se/explore-new-market/saudi-arabia/opening-hours

Because of this, Christians in Saudi Arabia meet either on Friday or Saturday.

Also, no church is officially recognized in Saudi Arabi , you can't even build a church except in the embassies or in private homes and facilities.


Since you are Catholic, please read
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_in_Saudi_Arabia

Happy Sunday

there is no Church yet you think Christian are allowed to meet on Fridays

BluntBoy:
I don't suppose they would want to. Our people are very superstitious. They may liken the breaking of the wafer to the breaking of Christ.

Catholics break the host every time, in fact at every mass the host eaten on the altar is always broken, the Bible says he took bread and broke it and said.....

Catholics aren't superstitious, but in a church where 20 people were not prepared for communion, the priest distributing won't know until it is too late and he has just 5 communion remaining.... that can cause trouble for him.

BluntBoy:
Bro, Christ never made Peter leader of the apostles.

What happened was that the Church is built on the Rock (the truth which came forth from Peter's mouth). It is sad that many people think the Church is built on Peter.

Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16)

The rock on which the Church is built is the Messiahship of Christ and the fact that He is the Son of the living God. That fact is the Rock and not a mere man like Peter.

I am not talking about the rock I am talking about the keys that was given to Peter.

do you understand what it means to have the keys of the kingdom