₦airaland Forum

live4dgospel:
I can't imagine what has driven Catholics into such deception! I asked you to present your case with the Bible reference not with some other people I don't know, which you called early church. If at all the Spirit is inside you, why won't you then interprete the Bible? So anyone who does not have access to your so-called early church interpretation will not interprete the Bible? This led me to wonder whether you actually know how the early church received the teachings from the apostles. Let me help you sir, the apostles preached the gospel and make more disciples as commanded by the Lord, then after establishing churches in many places, apostles were teaching in the churches about different issues. If they couldn't personally attend the church to teach, they simply wrote letters to the churches. The born again saints had received the Holy Spirit, so they understood what the apostles taught naturally. Their letters are available to us in the Bible now, so what other private interpretation are you talking about? If at all there were interpretations from your so-called early church, then such interpretations won't contradict the Bible itself for them to be true, so what's your fear. Remember all your fears stem from the questions I asked you: You have already failed woefully for the first one. Can you attempt the second? The question goes this way: Show me from the Bible the apostles teachings about the divinity of Mary the mother of Jesus?

neither the Catholic church nor the early Church nor the Bible teach "the divinity of Mary mother of Jesus", that was a lie you were told Catholics believe... your misconceptions are pretty easy to dismiss because there is no truth in them.

first you were misinformed that Constantine made Christianity a state religion and that was a big lie you were told, it was Theodosius who made Christianity a state religion by the edict of Thessalonica.

2nd you were misinformed that the inquisition was began by the Church in the 15th century, that was another lie you were told, the inquisition actually began in the 12th century before Protestantism began.

3rd the Bible wasn't written as a catalog of all Christian belief, in fact the apostles mainly preached orally and wrote usually to address specific issues in the local churches where they had already committed the fullness of the faith orally. in fact in 2 thess the apostle clearly teach that the Church must hold on to the teaching committed to her both in writing and orally NOT Bible alone. in fact Bible alone is not biblical... the Bible tell us to use both the Bible and the witness of the Church who have received the Gospel orally. that is why the witness of the early Christian is indispensable in getting the context and right interpretation of the Christian belief.

live4dgospel:
I hope that you understand everything that you said here. If you do then let me address the issue. The Roman Inquisition was not established by the state because of civil unrest, this is your first lie! Rather the Inquisition was establised by Holy See of the Roman Catholic Church in the 15th century as Catholic Church's Counter-Reformation against the spread of Protestantism. And Roman Catholic appointed people to preside over it. The purpose of the Inquisition, if you don't know, was to combat whatever Roman Catholic called heresy and alternate religious doctrine, this is your second lie! The Inquisition moved further to tackle some other issues like love magic, witchcraft, cultural morality, superstitions, Judaizing, sorcery, blasphemy, immorality etc. From its inception The Roman Catholic Church was fully responsible for all judgement and prosecution, this is yet another lie from you. It was later after the 18th century that the state started suppressing all the local Inquisitions and finally eliminated the power of the Church to prosecute heresy. Again the trial of Galileo Galilei provided a clue to what the Inquisition was all about, even though he was forced to recant from his view, he was still sentenced to house arrest till his death. This is yet another lie from you for saying that Inquisition gave people chance to abandon their beliefs. There was some other thing you hid, that's "forced confession", the Inquisition was well known for forcing people to make false confession i.e they forced people to say they did what they didn't do by torturing them, especially the rich and wealthy, all in effort to confiscate their properties after executing them! This is still yet a proof that Emperor Constantine not only legalized Catholicism but also made it state religion, this is what you previously denied! Could a church exercise such power, if the state didn't support it? I think, it is either you have poor knowledge of church history or you tried to hide the truth.

again you seem largely ignorant of this topic.



the inquisition began in the 12th century not the 15th century, it predates the Protestant Reformation by over 300 years, so you are incorrect, the inquisition was not started in the 15th century.

the inquisition is a Church trial but it never pronounced a death sentence, it was forbidden from condemning anyone to death, all who were unrepentant heretics were handed over to the magistrate of the state, it was the state who did the sentencing, let me tell you something, in the over 300 years of the Spanish inquisition Spain still has records of over 44000 cases were tried less than 1% was handed over to the state and got a death sentence .... it was the least bloody court in all Europe, in fact criminals in the secular courts usually appealed to be brought before the inquisition because they knew they will have the least sentence... a inquisition of over 300 years only convicted less than 1% for heresy and still less got a death sentence from the secular courts while the Protestant king Henry alone executed an estimated 57000 people in just 12
years... that should tell you how lenient it was.

there was recanting, Galileo was treated harshly as a political matter, he had insulted a few people who used his trial to get him, but even at that he wasn't given death sentence even though he was found guilty of suspected heresy, he was sent to his castle to spend the rest of his days, not even a prison...his property was not confiticated and he still got family around and could write. in a Protestant England he would have been killed just for going to mass.

every court in Europe used torture but none was as guided as the inquisition which was prohibited from drawing blood, from injuring and from loss of limbs with the presence of a doctor and to be used once Protestants didn't have such restrictions.


lastly you should learn to make your research it is wrong to speak in ignorance. Christianity was made a state religion by the Edict of Thessalonica in 380
AD, by Emperor Theodosius I not Constantine. make research and stop spewing untruth

live4dgospel:
If you you can't use the Bible alone then rest your case, I will not entertain presenting 'unknown and imaginary early church members and their interpretation'. This is a deception of the highest order common to all Catholics.

there is nothing imaginary or unknown about the early Christians, unless you are totally averse to making research or intellectually lazy, or so dishonest that you wouldn't even dare to look at their writings.... or all of the above.

there is nothing imaginary or unknown about the early Christians I'll be quoting, there is no deception there, unless of course you are aware that the way you misinterpret the Bible is totally wrong and contradictory to the entire Christian faith.

MrMystrO:
My Good friend, Morality has no place in the Natural law, So it is very much subjective because it is a human creation. When a Lion kills all the baby lions in a pride so the females can mate with him again, i ask you is it a Bad thing? Of course when you look at it from the Human perspective it is Bad but then who are you to judge the lions? judging the lion means questioning Nature because Nature has made it that way. This is just one example out of a million more. So at the end of the Day, The Deeply enlightened and philosophical minds know that Good and Bad, the basis of the human morality is exclusively a human construct and does not have any place in the Natural World whatsoever. We make up Laws that are "Moral" to us because we have to create a society where people can Live together and people cannot live together without Giving up their Subjective perceptions in Favor of Objective ones that suits everyone. Society bound by Law is in a very "deep" sense, Slavery, But a very useful one at that. I hope i was able to pass this across well enough. Peace.

then what do you understand by natural law?

we are not talking about animals we are talking about humans.

you claim morality has no basis in the natural world then you contradict yourself by saying it is biological ingrained in humans...abeg decide



2) the fact that morality is biologically ingrained in us
shows that nature has given us moral codes before
hand. These moral codes are the same for all
humans and are not discussed rather we just know
them hence their objectivity. These moral codes play
a role in our survival amongst ourselves.

if you believe the above then you agree with me that morality is objective and not a subjective case as ladyhus says

ibnvictor:

THE SHEPHERD GOES HOME:
The Catholic Diocese of Kafanchan announces with great shock but with total submission to the will of God, the passing to glory of her Shepherd, Most Rev. Dr. Joseph Danlami Bagobiri which took place in the early hours of Tuesday, 27th February, 2018. He died peacefully at the Archbishop's House in Kaduna. May his soul and the soul's of the faithful departed rest with the Lord - Amen.
Priests are by this information directed to offer Masses for the repose of his soul while awaiting further information.
Revd. Fr. Emmanuel Uchechukwu Okolo - Chancellor, Kafanchan Diocese.

I hope they get a new bishop quickly

ibnvictor:

THE SHEPHERD GOES HOME:
The Catholic Diocese of Kafanchan announces with great shock but with total submission to the will of God, the passing to glory of her Shepherd, Most Rev. Dr. Joseph Danlami Bagobiri which took place in the early hours of Tuesday, 27th February, 2018. He died peacefully at the Archbishop's House in Kaduna. May his soul and the soul's of the faithful departed rest with the Lord - Amen.
Priests are by this information directed to offer Masses for the repose of his soul while awaiting further information.
Revd. Fr. Emmanuel Uchechukwu Okolo - Chancellor, Kafanchan Diocese.

Prayer for the Dead
In your hands, O Lord,
we humbly entrust our brothers and sisters.
In this life you embraced them with your tender love;
deliver them now from every evil
and bid them eternal rest.
The old order has passed away:
welcome them into paradise,
where there will be no sorrow, no weeping or pain,
but fullness of peace and joy
with your Son and the Holy Spirit
forever and ever.
R/. Amen.
Prayers Immediately after Death

Saints of God, come to his/her aid!
Come to meet him/her, Angels of the Lord!
R/. Receive his/her soul and present him/her to God the
Most High.
May Christ, who called you, take you to himself;
may Angels lead you to Abraham's side. R/.
Give him/her eternal rest, O Lord,
and may your light shine on him/her forever. R/.
Let us pray.
All-powerful and merciful God,
we commend to you N., your servant.
In your mercy and love,
blot out the sins he/she has committed
through human weakness.
In this world he/she has died:
let him/her live with you forever.
Through Christ our Lord.
R/. Amen.
These verses may also be used.
V/. Eternal rest grant unto him/her, O Lord.
R/. And let perpetual light shine upon him/her.
V/. May he/she rest in peace.
R/. Amen.
V/. May his/her soul and the souls of all the faithful
departed,
through the mercy of God,
rest in peace.
R/. Amen.
.

Luther was anti Pope and was attracted to both the eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox, since they are also anti Pope.

he and Calvin was rejected as heretics by both the churches his core doctrine was considered and is still considered heresy

BluntBoy:
People like who talked about it

a whole bunch of early Christian too




St. Irenaeus
"The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having
founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . .
handed over the office of the episcopate to
Linus" (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]).
Tertullian
"[T]his is the way in which the apostolic
churches transmit their lists: like the church of
the Smyrneans, which records that Polycarp
was placed there by John, like the church of
the Romans, where Clement was ordained by
Peter" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 32:2 [A.D.
200]).
The Little Labyrinth
"Victor . . . was the thirteenth bishop of Rome
from Peter" (The Little Labyrinth [A.D. 211], in
Eusebius, Church History 5:28:3).
Cyprian of Carthage
"The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says,
‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will
build my Church, and the gates of hell will not
overcome it. . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18]. On him [Peter]
he builds the Church, and to him he gives the
command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and
although he assigns a like power to all the
apostles, yet he founded a single chair
[cathedra], and he established by his own
authority a source and an intrinsic reason for
that unity. . . . If someone [today] does not hold
fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that
he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the
chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built,
can he still be confident that he is in the
Church?" (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4;
first edition [A.D. 251]).
"Cornelius was made bishop by the decision of
God and of his Christ, by the testimony of
almost all the clergy, by the applause of the
people then present, by the college of venerable
priests and good men, at a time when no one
had been made [bishop] before him—when the
place of [Pope] Fabian, which is the place of
Peter, the dignity of the sacerdotal chair, was
vacant. Since it has been occupied both at the
will of God and with the ratified consent of all
of us, whoever now wishes to become bishop
must do so outside. For he cannot have
ecclesiastical rank who does not hold to the
unity of the Church" (Letters 55:[52]):8 [A.D.
253]).
"With a false bishop appointed for themselves
by heretics, they dare even to set sail and carry
letters from schismatics and blasphemers to
the chair of Peter and to the principal church
[at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its
source" (ibid., 59:14).
Eusebius of Caesarea
"Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul [2
Tim. 4:10], but Linus, whom he mentions in the
Second Epistle to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21] as his
companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in
the episcopate of the church there, as has
already been shown. Clement also, who was
appointed third bishop of the church at Rome,
was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-
soldier [Phil. 4:3]" (Church History 3:4:9–10
[A.D. 312]).

live4dgospel:
I am neither a Protestant nor a Pentecostal, in fact I have never read any book about the so-called Martin Luther neither do I believe in his doctrines or others like him. However, I know he was one of the key men of the Reformation and a supporter of the Doctrine of Justification to comfort themselves. This doctrine claims that even though we have sin in our hearts, just because we believe in Jesus, God would regard us as righteous. This is only a man-made doctrine. People have made and believed in such a doctrine to hide their sins, trying to live in the complacency of this doctrine. But because they are still revealed as sinners before the Law, their sins come to weigh down heavier and heavier on their minds. To be freed from all our sins, we have no other choice but to believe in the gospel that contains God’s righteousness, and this is the gospel of the water and the Spirit we are now preaching to the whole world. This is the only way to be delivered from all our sins. But that is by the way. Let me address the issue you raised, If the faith of the true early churches(i.e the churches that received the same faith of the apostles) before agree with the present Roman Catholic Church, it therefore implies that what Roman Catholic Church believes is the same as what is written in Bible about the faith of the apostles, right? Now since you said the faith of apostles is in the Bible. I ask you to forget about the scriptures committed to the early church, since I can't validate them. And don't tell me it presents us with right context in which the Bible is to be understood because you have already said its the same as that written in the Bible. So go ahead and answer the previous questions I raised which you have agreed to answer with reference to Bible.

first, you reject one of the doctrine invented by Luther but you still believe in other, the doctrine of Bible Alone you have been using was invented by him.

2ndly the interpretation of the Bible is the issue, I can go about writing Bible verses but both of us will disagree on its interpretation... that is the issue. if I'll be discussing scriptures with you then the real issue is the interpretation. the early Church interpreted it in line with apostolic teaching and maintained one Church, Protestant interprete the Bible according to their own understanding and have 16000+denominations and new ones every day.

live4dgospel:
Don't tell me about the so-called 'early church interpretation', this is ridiculous! The early church members that gave the interpretation, are they not the ones you were asking me to provide of which I told you I could not deal with because it can't be proved biblically? I mean how can I know if the members of the early church that gave the interpretation are not the ones that perverted the gospel or the true ones that continued in the teachings of the apostles, as we see in the case of Galatia (Galatians 1:1-10). Even though I'm not a historian I'm not ignorant! Maybe those early church members you are trying to give me their interpretations now were actually the runners that handed the baton to the present day Roman Catholic Church. So go ahead and answer the questions with the Bible alone.

if you can't verify who the early Church was then I encourage you to go and make research and verify who they were and what they believed, because believe me I won't be interpreting the Bible the way you protestant love to do which is pretty much misinterpretation, I'll be going back to how the entire Christian Church has always taught and understood those scripture... so make up your mind, I won't be using the Bible alone but the Bible alone with the apostolic teaching taught in the early Church.

live4dgospel:
How then will you being part of the movement reject the heresies of Roman Catholic? Okay! If you are confident in yourself, answer these questions. 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? And show me where it is written in the Bible that Mary is divine and she can intercede for us in prayers, and show also where and when the apostles or the early church believed and did so, if it's not true that Roman Catholic corrupted the gospel?

the first issue you raised is the Inquisition abi?


funny enough the Inquisition was formed to prevent the senseless killing of Christians by secular courts on charges of heresy, 2ndly the inquisition was the most just medieval court system of its time and was prohibited by the Church from pronouncing death sentence.

it is only people who are misinformed who go about shouting about the inquisition.

maybe I'll explain.


by 1200ad almost all of Europe had converted to Christianity, all the kings were Christian kings...in fact in 1200 if you went about shouting that Jesus is a mere prophet not God, you will immediately cause social unrest....I'll give you an example... about the 400s a bishop taught in his Church that there are two Jesus, one Jesus was a man the other was a God, the bishops name was Nestorius... there was immediate protest in the entire city and social unrest followed. to prevent such from happening the state criminalised heresy...it was a criminal offense to teach heresy... this was to prevent the civil unrest that usually happened, so if someone taught heresy he may be handed over to the state to be judged instead of protesting.


some people started to abuse this an started to accuse innocent people of heresy, and many of the secular courts didn't know so much about heresy and could easily punish the innocent... the state too doesn't have the power to decide right doctrine....this is what gave rise to the inquisition. States requested that the Church provide learned men in theology who can truly tell if the doctrine in question is heretical, to prevent the innocent from been punished.

the inquisition strictly was a group of learned men who examined a certain teaching and decided if it was heretical or not. it was movable... so if the inquisition comes to a town, it will declare some days of grace and any heretic in the town was allowed to report himself and go home free, if after the grace period someone was accused of heresy, the accused is told to provide a list of his enemies, your enemy cannot testify against you... if the accusation is by those in the list you provided then you go home free. if not you'll be asked to explain what you believe, if there is heresy in it you'll be asked to recant and go home... if you don't recant and they are convinced it is heresy, then you will be handed over to the state, then you will be tried and punished according to state laws. the inquisition never sentenced people that was the state courts.

there is nothing in the inquisition about preventing people from finding the truth with your Bible. in fact reading the Bible was not a crime or an issue with the inquisition, the only thing that was frowned at was deliberately mistranslation of the Bible and distribution of mistranslated bibles, so 800 years ago the Jehovah witness Bible that says Jesus is a god, and those who deliberately mistranslated and distributed such bibles will be in trouble and such mistranslated bibles will be burnt.

so that is the number 1 misconception... the inquisition never prevented people from reading the Bible nor did it kill people, its job is to determine if a particular teaching was heretical to prevent the state from punishing the innocent.

who give the Church the right to determine heresy and truth? and judge matters? I guess you can answer that.


as for the state who acted to prevent civil unrest well this is the passage they based their rights on


ROM 14

Everyone must submit to the governing
authorities, for there is no authority except from
God, and those that exist are instituted by God.
So then, the one who resists the authority is
opposing God’s command, and those who oppose
it will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers
are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do
you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what
is good, and you will have its approval. For
government is God’s servant for your good. But if
you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry
the sword for no reason. For government is God’s
servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one
who does wrong.

BluntBoy:
OK, but it is not enough proof that Peter was pope or that a so-called "Chair of Peter" is in Rome.

Irenaeus did not speak of apostolic succession the way that the Catholic Church now speak of it. The Roman Catholic Church know the truth but they are keeping it from the rest of the world. They have it in their The Vatican Apostolic Library but would rather keep the rest of the world in ignorance rather than spill it. They know Peter was never in Rome nor buried in Rome; they have messages that would change the face of Christianity forever but they are safeguarding these materials in their hi-tech library and stopping them from reaching the world just as they once did to the Bible.

"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:32)

it seems you haven't read irenaeus, he spoke of apostolic succession exactly as Catholics today talks about it, he also bears historic witness of Peter been in Rome.

in fact I'll paste a little quote from his writing.




"1 . It is within the power of all, therefore, in every
Church , who may wish to see the truth , to
contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles
manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in
a position to reckon up those who were by the
apostles instituted bishops in the Churches , and [to
demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own
times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything
like what these [heretics ] rave about. For if the
apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were
in the habit of imparting to "the perfect" apart and privily
from the rest, they would have delivered them
especially to those to whom they were also committing
the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that
these men should be very perfect and blameless in all
things, whom also they were leaving behind as their
successors, delivering up their own place of
government to these men; which men, if they
discharged their functions honestly, would be a great
boon [to the Church ], but if they should fall away, the
direst calamity.
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a
volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the
Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in
whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by
vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion,
assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,]
by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles,
of the [b]very great, the very ancient, and universally
known Church founded and organized at Rome by the
two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ; as also [by
pointing out] the faith preached to men , which comes
down to our time by means of the successions of the
bishops . For it is a matter of necessity that every
Church should agree with this Church , on account of
its preeminent authority [potiorem principalitatem].
3. The blessed apostles , then, having founded and
built up the Church , committed into the hands of
Linus the office of the episcopate . Of this Linus, Paul
makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him
succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place
from the apostles , Clement was allotted the bishopric.
This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles , and
had been conversant with them, might be said to have
the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears],
and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone
[in this], for there were many still remaining who had
received instructions from the apostles . In the time of
this Clement, no small dissension having occurred
among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome
dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians,
exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith , and
declaring the tradition which it had lately received from
the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent , the
Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man , who
brought on the deluge, and called Abraham , who led
the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses,
set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has
prepared fire for the devil and his angels . From this
document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn
that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ , was
preached by the Churches, and may also understand
the apostolic tradition of the Church , since this Epistle
is of older date than these men who are now
propagating falsehood , and who conjure into existence
another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all
existing things. To this Clement there succeeded
Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth
from the apostles , Sixtus was appointed; after him,
Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then
Hyginus ; after him, Pius ; then after him, Anicetus .
Soter having succeeded Anicetus , Eleutherius does
now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the
inheritance of the episcopate . In this order, and by this
succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the
apostles , and the preaching of the truth , have come
down to us. And this is most abundant proof that
there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has
been preserved in the Church from the apostles until
now, and handed down in truth .[/b]
against heresy

BluntBoy:
OK, but it is not enough proof that Peter was pope or that a so-called "Chair of Peter" is in Rome.

Irenaeus did not speak of apostolic succession the way that the Catholic Church now speak of it. The Roman Catholic Church know the truth but they are keeping it from the rest of the world. They have it in their The Vatican Apostolic Library but would rather keep the rest of the world in ignorance rather than spill it. They know Peter was never in Rome nor buried in Rome; they have messages that would change the face of Christianity forever but they are safeguarding these materials in their hi-tech library and stopping them from reaching the world just as they once did to the Bible.

"Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:32)

it seems you haven't read irenaeus, he spoke of apostolic succession exactly as Catholics today talks about it, he also bears historic witness of Peter been in Rome.

in fact I'll paste a little quote from his writing.




"1 . It is within the power of all, therefore, in every
Church , who may wish to see the truth , to
contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles
manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in
a position to reckon up those who were by the
apostles instituted bishops in the Churches , and [to
demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own
times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything
like what these [heretics ] rave about. For if the
apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were
in the habit of imparting to "the perfect" apart and privily
from the rest, they would have delivered them
especially to those to whom they were also committing
the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that
these men should be very perfect and blameless in all
things, whom also they were leaving behind as their
successors, delivering up their own place of
government to these men; which men, if they
discharged their functions honestly, would be a great
boon [to the Church ], but if they should fall away, the
direst calamity.
2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a
volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the
Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in
whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by
vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion,
assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,]
by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles,
of the [b]very great, the very ancient, and universally
known Church founded and organized at Rome by the
two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ; as also [by
pointing out] the faith preached to men , which comes
down to our time by means of the successions of the
bishops . For it is a matter of necessity that every
Church should agree with this Church , on account of
its preeminent authority [potiorem principalitatem].
3. The blessed apostles , then, having founded and
built up the Church , committed into the hands of
Linus the office of the episcopate . Of this Linus, Paul
makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him
succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place
from the apostles , Clement was allotted the bishopric.
This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles , and
had been conversant with them, might be said to have
the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears],
and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone
[in this], for there were many still remaining who had
received instructions from the apostles . In the time of
this Clement, no small dissension having occurred
among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome
dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians,
exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith , and
declaring the tradition which it had lately received from
the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent , the
Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man , who
brought on the deluge, and called Abraham , who led
the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses,
set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has
prepared fire for the devil and his angels . From this
document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn
that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ , was
preached by the Churches, and may also understand
the apostolic tradition of the Church , since this Epistle
is of older date than these men who are now
propagating falsehood , and who conjure into existence
another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all
existing things. To this Clement there succeeded
Evaristus. Alexander followed Evaristus; then, sixth
from the apostles , Sixtus was appointed; after him,
Telephorus, who was gloriously martyred; then
Hyginus ; after him, Pius ; then after him, Anicetus .
Soter having succeeded Anicetus , Eleutherius does
now, in the twelfth place from the apostles, hold the
inheritance of the episcopate . In this order, and by this
succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the
apostles , and the preaching of the truth , have come
down to us. And this is most abundant proof that
there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has
been preserved in the Church from the apostles until
now, and handed down in truth .[/b]
against heresy

live4dgospel:
I'm just happy as you cleared your conscience with the words above. If you can just set aside your temperament, stop the vain talks 'being insincere while being a Christian and reading the Scriptures', let's deal with the issue now: The core message here is that the early churches passed down the faith but along the way the devil agents e.g Roman Catholic corrupted the gospel, right? Now as I have told you, I would like to repeat, some of the early churches included the ones at Galatia "and all the brethren who are with me, To the churches of Galatia:"(Galatians 1:2) and some others in Rome, Philippines etc. Please humbly tell me the relevance of asking me to list the members of those churches, since it was not written in Bible? Or do you want me to search the web and bring out names of people which I cannot independently verify? I repeat, I can't do that cos the Bible is my power. Again if you say the members of the early churches are part of your Roman Catholic Church (as I guess you are trying to insinuate). Then I will not oppose this with my own opinions, rather let's judge it by comparing Roman Catholic Church doctrines with faith of the apostles as written in Bible, as we all know the true early churches inherited the same faith of the apostles. Since the faith of the apostles are written in the New Testament books, so the Bible becomes a powerful tool to reach a valid conclusion. Have I not tried to explain how irrelevant your question is? If you insist on such question, it therefore means you're weak and fidgeting.

lol,

I happen to hate useless argument so I'll let you go, even though I hate a discussions where the other person refuses to answer questions.

I'll address your earlier questions, I'll do better than that, I'll address your misconception, show you what the Church really teaches, show the scripture for it and the early Church interpretation of those scripture.

live4dgospel:
Yes, the present version of Roman Catholic Church was created by Roman Emperor Constantine after the Edict of Millan in 313 AD when he legalized and made it the state religion. However, before that the churches of God existed in Rome which as you said suffered much persecutions and scattered by the Roman authority. But since I'm not a historian, I can't talk about such with conviction as I would with the Bible. Hence, anyone who claims the present Roman Catholic Church is a continuation of the early churches in Rome, I can only challenge over that with the Word of God and not with history. I know very that the true early churches had the same as the apostles so any church that claims to be part of the early churches should have the same faith as the apostles. Now the faith of the apostles is written in the Bible, so the Bible has become the reservoir of truths to judge all doctrinal issues.

if this is true then why do the belief of the Church before Constantine and the belief of the Church after Constantine totally agree? Constantine stopped the persecution of Christians but he didn't make it a state religion, that happened long after.

there is no historical proof that the Church scattered after Constantine, in fact that is untrue, the Church before Constantine stopped the persecution and the Church after Constantine stopped the persecution was same.

the early Church did receive the faith of the apostles but you won't agree with them because you seem to interpret scriptures wrongly according to someone called Martin Luther.

the faith of the apostles is in the Bible but not in the Bible alone, it is both in scriptures and committed to the early Church, unfortunately you will interpret it wrongly if you do not understand the sense in which it is taught.... the early Church presents us with the right context in which the Bible is to be understood.

solite3:
Roman catholic church was created by the pagan roman empire.
The early church were scattered because of persecution.

the post wasn't addressed to you, it was addressed to
someone who claimed the gospel was transmitted in the
early church and that their understanding is a help in
understanding scriptures.
if you share that belief then you may respond to the
questions, if not waka pass.
which early church are you talking about, abi you think
the early church ended with Titus, if it didn't then you
can tell us its members.
I'm still asking who told you the Catholic Church
corrupted the Gospel,

BluntBoy:
People like who talked about it

like ireneaus... all the early Christian who talked about Peter, they all agree.

half truths

Sarassin:
To be fair, she did say the proposition was at the instigation of a friend.

I saw that, that is why I bothered to respond

live4dgospel:
Insincerity? You have no relevant question at all! If you did I would have answered you. I can see your anger has reached its peak cos I can feel your temperamental voice, when your anger subsides come back and answer my relevant questions.

I don't have a temperamental voice, it is not your job to decide if my questions are relevant or not, your job is to answer them.

if to you my questions are irrelevant then yours too are irrelevant to me... that is how insincere people behave when they can't answer simple questions. I didn't ask you to describe my questions I asked you to answer them.




which early church are you talking about, abi you think
the early church ended with Titus, if it didn't then you
can tell us its members.
I'm still asking who told you the Catholic Church
corrupted the Gospel,

Ladyhippolyta88:
Read about the age of enlightenment and how it was morally right to own a slave have you read about the gladiators and the things that were considered morally right you don't have to be religious to know what morality is because atheistic countries are more peaceful thanks others.I am no atheist but martinez19 can explain better morality is subjective.

I am well aware of the age of enlightenment and the humanists of that period... I am also well aware that certain moral questions were not totally resolved until later...though the Catholic Church had taught the immorality of chattel slavery long before the enlightenment began and also taught that gladiator contest was a immoral sport long before the enlightenment.

again these are objective moral truths... that people came to recognise them only later doesn't affect their truth.

since you believe morality is subjective, do you consider murder to be OK? and everybody should be allowed to decide since it is subjective? if you don't think everyone should be allowed to decide on whether to murder others or not that means you agree that morality is objective.


even atheistic morality is by and large objective, it is based on something called natural law and balanced upon utilitarian principles so even in atheistic societies murder is still and objective moral evil to be avoided or punished.


I don't know Martinez well, but I can assure you there isn't a single atheistic society where everyone is allowed to make up for himself what he considers moral against the principle of common good....you won't find a society where everyone is allowed to make up his mind on whether or not murder is OK.

live4dgospel:
You know from the bottom of your heart that I can never run from things pertaining to the gospel(because the Bible is my power, but your church doctrine is your power. If not you would have answered my questions from the Bible rather asking me to list the members of the early church. I can talk about the Scriptures with conviction, but not about history that's not written in the Bible. If you have ears of understanding and a humble heart, you would have understood me well. For my message is clear: if your church is part of early church and the members of your church are part of the church, then what your church believes should be the same as what the apostles believed as it was written down in the Bible, so then the Bible becomes a powerful tool to judge this. And you are still asking me tell you the members of the early church ). You are simply hiding from your failure to answer my questions under the pretence of your so-called question. I know that other viewers are reading these, maybe they will judge better. However, I will leave you in your ignorance as I said.

you are the one who brought up the issue of the early Christians and then you're the one running from answering questions about it, just like someone who is insincere.

I also remember I was the first to ask you questions which you still haven't answered and yet you have the gut to claim I'm sidestepping your questions.... what insincerity from someone who claims to be and Christian and even claim to read scriptures.

Ladyhippolyta88:
Tell me something morality they say is subjective and does not in totality concern religion.Like the other poster said such laws should be applied to their own schools .

morality is actually objective, that is called natural law, stealing, murder, adultery will always be wrong, these are objective truths whether we agree or not morality isn't subjective.

and it does concern religion as any philosopher will tell you, it has always been the business of religion to propose ethics and morals.

did they force anyone to do anything, they simply states that an action is morally unacceptable.

Emmanystone:
I was having this chat with some friends about Sex in marriage. They were of the opinion that sex is completely Carnal. One said, the only Holy thing in Sex is because it was ordained and instituted by God. But, the act of it is Carnal.

I totally disagreed, saying everything about sex is Holy. A very deep ordinance that goes far beyond man. I said, sex is worship. When a man and his wife are engage in sex, God sees them just the way He sees them at the alter worshipping Him.

One asked me a question which threw me off. I tried to wriggle myself out of it, i couldn't

This is the question she asked, 'If Sex in marriage is not carnal (pls bare in mind that Carnality is anything done outside the dictates of God), Why did God command that a man should not have sex with his wife during Fasting and Prayer?

Have you, as a Christian ever wondered why the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul said we should abstain from sex during fasting and prayer?

Pls contribute your thoughts.

Well, i asked the Holy Spirit and He gave me an answer, but let me hear from others first.

I wasn't invited but I'll drop my 2 cent.

sex in marriage is holy and covenantal, it is the God given means of sustaining and renewing the marriage covenant, it is both desired and commanded by God.


in another sense it is"profane" in the same sense that marriage is profane and eating is profane... they are all primarily engineered towards our physical life...they are earthly realities that will not follow us to heaven... it is only in this sense that married sex can be call profane or earthly.


a time for fasting is a time for making sacrifices, its stands to reason that even as a beneficial thing like food is put aside so also a beneficial thing like sex can be put aside. food isn't wrong or carnal...it is just sacrificed during fasting so too sex.


2ndly the apostles were Jews, the Jewish priest kept away from sex during their times of service, during fasting etc, the Christians took similar practices... if you read up the early Christians you'll see the minister avoid sex around the time of his service.... these were sacrifices people made to put themselves in a spiritual mood, food is not unclean in fact the Bible says the marriage bed is honorable, yet fasting or abstinences means giving up something good and right and beneficial in other to stave the body and energize the spirit.


there is nothing wrong with married sex or food,they are just earthly realities so people are encouraged to give them up for a time to pursue spiritual things.


if you don't understand this then I'll suggest you recheck and reexamine why you fast, does that mean food is wrong?

Emmanystone:
Sriously? Hahahahahahahahaha. Bros, no Scripture stands independent to make meaning. What Jesus says in Genesis applies in Revelation, and what happens in Revelation applies in Genesis.

Scriptures interprete each other. How will you know this when you believe in Roman traditions instead of the Bible.

revelation was a book of its own, it was compiled as part of the Bible in the 4th century by the Catholic Church.

it isn't talking about the whole Bible it clearly says don't add or subtract from the prophecy in "THIS BOOK", it is very specific. the new testament wasn't a book at the time.


its only people who have comprehension problems that try to make that passage mean what it doesn't mean, it is very specific. this book.

the post wasn't addressed to you, it was addressed to someone who claimed the gospel was transmitted in the early church and that their understanding is a help in understanding scriptures.

solite3:
Roman catholic church is an invention of roman empire.
Paul never establish roman catholic church.

if you share that belief then you may respond to the questions, if not waka pass.


which early church are you talking about, abi you think
the early church ended with Titus, if it didn't then you
can tell us its members.
I'm still asking who told you the Catholic Church
corrupted the Gospel,

live4dgospel:
I have seen your heart fidgeting, I hereby leave you!

is this your excuse to tuck tails and run?


answer the question I asked you, leave my assumed fidgeting, answer the question if you can.

BluntBoy:
What historical source, independent of the Catholic Church, mentioned Peter as Bishop of Rome There is not even a single independent historical case of Peter ever reaching Rome, let alone being buried there, aside the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles called The Acts of Peter.

all the early Christian who talked about it, unless of course you believe all the early Christians were Catholics, which pretty much proves my point.

BluntBoy:
When did Christ establish the Catholic Church I wonder why you people continue to swallow up this lie. It has neither a historical not a Biblical backing.

Christ never elevated Peter above the other Apostles and nowhere was it mentioned that the Apostleship of the Twelve could be passed from generation to generation. It ended with the Apostles. Peter was neither a "pope" nor "Bishop of Rome".

it does have historical backing, the Bible on the other hand is the function of whoever is interpreting or misinterpreting it.

the historical case though is solid, the Bible stopped recording Christian history before 80AD and even that still supports the Catholic Church, have you ever asked yourself about the Churches written in scriptures and where they are today.

the ancient churches are catholic and eastern Orthodox and Peter was Bishop of Rome the historic sources are also conclusive

live4dgospel:
Well you should have asked me directly: "Is Roman Catholic not the early church?" Again, this is funny! What's a church? If not group of human beings who have the same faith as the apostles? Are you then asking me to provide you with list of members of Roman Catholic church? Listen now let me clear your misconception, the church of God in Rome established by Paul is one of the the early churches, likewise in Corinth, Philippines, etc. Even after the apostles died, they continued in the faith passing it down to the subsequent churches. Now if you claim that this your Roman Catholic is that church Paul wrote a letter to or a subsequent church which also inherited the faith of the apostles. I will not doubt you in my own opinion, but rather we will put it to a test by comparing the faith of Roman Catholic church with that of the apostles written down in the Bible. You know very that even while the apostles were writing their epistles, there were many who believed in a different gospel and tried to corrupt the original gospel. For instance, Paul wrote a letter to the Galatians concerning this, some set of people were preaching a different gospel, teaching that human works give salvation rather than faith in the gospel, whom Paul said they would be accursed (Galatians 1:6-9) Tell me is your Roman Catholic church the one that inherited the correct faith or the one that corrupted the gospel. So everything balled down to answering the two questions I have raised, so we can prove that. As we continue I will ask more questions about your church doctrines. Can you now answer them or not?

again this isn't my question, you are answering what I didn't ask.

which early church are you talking about, abi you think
the early church ended with Titus, if it didn't then you
can tell us its members.
I'm still asking who told you the Catholic Church
corrupted the Gospel,

Emmanystone:
Good News Translation Revelation 22:19
[b]And if any take anything away from the prophetic words of this book, God will take away from them their share of the fruit of the tree of life and of the Holy City, which are described in this book.

hope you know that passage is talking about the book of revelation alone?

What scripture gives it's enough for us to live by, do not add to it. Satan wants us to add so that he can plant errors.


Question is, who instituted it? YHWH or Jesus? Who?

If Catholic church is lead by the Holy Spirit, shouldn't she follow sxiptures?


Satan na wao. He ceases every opportunity to plant lies. Did Paul institute an Order of Celibacy in the Priesthood? No. Did he say go and form a priestly order where men and women will come in and remain unmarried? No.

Do you even realize that the order of the Priesthood ended with Christ? Where did you get this your Priest of both males and females? Is it Jewish? No. Is it Christian? No. Is it Hellenist? YES.

In Hellenism both males and females are priests and Priestess. You catholics calls your Priestesses, Nuns.

Paul said, if you can control your sexual urge like him and serve God in purity then fine, do it. But if not 'Let everyman have his own wife and every woman her own husband. Not a place to promote homosexuality and Pedophilia.


Your practices are Unscriptural. And we as Christians live by the word. The Word of Gos is the manual for living, outside of it, there'll be error. And the Catholic Church is full of error.

Bros come out of Catholic Church o. Jokes apart, Hellenism is satanic and that is what the Catholic Church practices.

unfortunately you seem unable to comprehend even the Bible.

its a Pity

live4dgospel:
Which questions? Did you even read well my comment that led to this? I said the predecessors of faith passed down the gospel( from apostles to early church) but along the way from early church, the devil agents like Roman Catholic corrupted the gospel. You asked whether I know what apostles and early church believed in, if the transmission ended with Titus (funny)! Next you asked who told me Roman Catholic corrupted the gospel. Then I asked two questions to use as criteria to jugde whether the gospel was successfully passed down to us or was corrupted. Now we both know that what the apostles believed in was written in the Bible, and the early church who inherited the same correct faith from them also believed in what's written in the Bible. Consequently we are going to use the Bible to judge whether the gospel was successfully passed down to us. So what's your fear, just go ahead and happily answer the questions.

you still haven't answered my questions

which early church are you talking about, abi you think the early church ended with Titus, if it didn't then you can tell us its members.

I'm still asking who told you the Catholic Church corrupted the Gospel,

the sooner you directly address these questions the sooner I'll answer yours.

Emmanystone:
Who were these early Christians? I hope you know the Priesthood was an Old Covenant Oder? They stood to do what Christ should do and as Christ came, their office became obsolete? In this New Covenant Christ is the High Priest and everyone of us, a priest.

Christ was the Lamb they kept sacrificing. When Christ was Sacrificed, all their job ended.

The Catholic Priesthood is still functional because her gods and goddesses have nothing to do with the finished work of Christ

then you haven't really been studying your Bible.

the first kingdom of priests is the Israelites, God consecrated them and made them all priests

ex 19:5
5 'Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and
keep My covenant, then you shall be My own
possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is
Mine; 6 and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests
and a holy nation.' These are the words that you shall
speak to the sons of Israel."

they also had a high priest.

then they had ministerial priests and levites .


that is 3 classes of priests.

1. a kingdom of priests.
2. a high priest.
3. ministerial priests and levites who minister to the kingdom of priests.

Jesus didn't annihilate the old covenant he fulfilled it and gave it its true meaning thus transcending it.

the book of Hebrew tell us that just like the old covenant we also have a high priest, he is Jesus our Lord.

Peter tells us that just as the old covenant was a kingdom of priests so too we are all a kingdom of priests

1 Peter 2:9
But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal
PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR
God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may
proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called
you out of darkness into His marvelous light;


the last class of priests is the ministerial priest and levites.... in fact God himself prophesied that they too will be in the new covenant.
Isaiah 66:20

20 "Then they shall bring all your brethren from all
the nations as a grain offering to the LORD, on
horses, in chariots, in litters, on mules and on
camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem," says the
LORD, "just as the sons of Israel bring their grain
offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD.
21 "I will also take some of them for priests and for
Levites," says the LORD. 22 "For just as the new
heavens and the new earth Which I make will endure
before Me," declares the LORD, "So your offspring
and your name will endure.…

and according to the new testament the apostolicly ordained ministers of the new covenant are ministerial priests... that prophesy is fulfilled.

Romans 15:15-16 --"But I have written to
you rather boldly in some respects to
remind you, because of the grace given me
by God to be a minister of Christ Jesus to
the Gentiles in performing the PRIESTLY
service of the Gospel of God , so that the
offering up of the Gentiles may be
acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit."



so in Christ Jesus we have a priesthood in the order of Melchizedek and in him all the shadows and types of the old covenant are fulfilled. we have a high priest, a Royal kingdom of priests and also the ministerial priests who officiate in the Church.

so yes we still have a active priesthood in the new covenant.
the old covenant high priest became obsolete and Jesus came as the new high priest, isreal the kingdom of priests gave way for the Church the new kingdom of priests and the ministerial priests of the old law became obsolete and gave way for the ministerial priesthood of the apostles who ordained others as deacons, presbyter and bishops.

it is a pity these your end time churches aren't teaching you guys the full extent of the priesthood