@Atam,

Atam-Man:

@ricadelide and pilgrim.1
Kind thanks for the civil replies/contributions to the debate. There is a chance you all are well-intentioned, but I still have issues with the attitude on show in this topic, the person or persons I picked out are only representative of what I find distasteful about the shouting match here. Are you guys sure Nigeria would not be like the then Taliban-run Afghanistan if persons like you were put in positions of authority? Remember that the Taliban had little or no respect for any opinion that was contrary to theirs; Nigeria is tottering on the brink of implosion and here you are talking about religious opinions as if they constitute the biggest problem or have caused the biggest problem in Nigeria.

I think you're taking things further than is warranted here, and I would rather you offer a balance in your cherry picking opinions. Where were you when Catholics on this thread synically referred to others as "ants" and "devils"? If you'd followed events in these discussions, you'd certainly find that I'd held my cool when Catholics have been vitriolic towards me - and I came back only when such aspersions were being used on other Christians. What would you have done if someone referred to you with bedevilled language?

I really don't think you have any substance to your complaints here. Tough luck if your aim here is to equate me to the General of the Taliban Forces - and you'd only further expose the fact that you haven't taken the time to look at issues here objectively, nor are you demonstrating any interest to do so.

Atam-Man:

Before you begin to throw the Bible at me, take a step backward and think out your position very carefully. Why do you find it hard not to be sarcastic about other peoples views?

Excuse me? How many times did I offer that Catholics be civil in the way they addressed others? This is the second time you're pretending not to have noticed their attitude, and I'm not surprised you'd be quite cordial to have insinuated the 'Taliban' motif if you even had the slightest clue of a good redress.

I don't go out of my way to be sarcastic. And I certainly don't pretend to be anybody's bootlicker when they begin to cast aspersions at others. Why is it so hard for people to be cordial when they discuss with others? And I noticed you could hardly hold back from your own temptation to register your comments with a bit of sarcasm.

Atam-Man:

Are you convinced this is the best way to spread the Love of Christ? Has it ever occurred to you that you may be obsessed with the whole issue of SIN and FORGIVENESS, forgetting that the kernel of Christ message was and remains LOVE?

My dear friend, people addressing others as "DEVILS" have no love in their hearts. Period. So if you're obsessed about anything, I expected you to face up to reality and not try to humour me with a pretence to have missed the point.

Atam-Man:

Notice I have not resorted to some cleverly chosen quotes from the Bible to make my points, I could resort to that if you and the so-called Catholics here refuse to listen to reason.

I could read you from a mile - and that's why I held back from quoting any verses to you. I'm not a Catholic; and anyone trying to be umpire on their behalf and pretending to look the other way as though Catholics here have not resorted to unwarranted language, is simply not demonstrating a clear objective stance.

Atam-Man:

Talk intelligibly and use to Bible to support what you say, do not go about it the other way round

Thanks for your advice. I would expect you to be objective and not pretend not to notice the attitudes of Catholics here - if they have anything intelligent to offer.

Regards.

@Carlosein

Cool men, I really sat down and read your link and it brought joy to me. I was really over happy. If these people can make out their time and read the link, they will understand what we are saying. There was no difference between the author of that article and my friend Pilgrim. However, the only difference is that the author has finally realized the truth while Pilgrim is still struggling to find the truth.

There is another man who was a Protestant Pastor for over 7 years and later became a Catholic Priest and a host of them. This man when he was a Protestant Pastor never liked to hear anything about Catholicism. All his sermons were against Catholicism but today he’s ordained Catholic Priest. I used to yarn with him when I was in Port Harcourt. His name is Rev. Fr. Brown and his Parish then was Mater Misericordiae Parish, Rumuomasi, Port Harcourt, that was also my Parish but he has been posted to another Parish now. The Church is the biggest Parish in Rivers State. First, he was OO Ogbu Pastor, later a Protestant Pastor for over 7 years and he confessed after going through the bible several times, meditated on it; he now realized that only Catholic (no single Protestant Church) has the truth. He apologized for all his attacks against Catholic Church. Go to Port Harcourt and ask of Rev. Fr Brown of former Mater Misericordia Parish they will yarn you better.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1096019/posts

Dear Catholics, here's a simple way of the cross for you. With daily use, u'll find ursel saying it from your heart:

THE WAY OF THE CROSS

1st Station
Jesus is condemned to death
My Jesus, teach me resignation in trials

2nd Station
Jesus receives his cross
My Jesus, this cross should be mine, not thine, because my sins crucified thee

3rd Station
Jesus falls the first time under his cross
O Jesus, by this first fall. Never let me fall into mortal sin

4th Station
Jesus is met by his blessed Mother Mary
O Jesus, may no human tie, however dear, keep me from following the way of the cross

5th Station
The cross is placed upon Simon of Cyrene
Simon unwillingly assisted thee, may I with patience suffer all for thee

6th station
Veronica wipes the face of Jesus
You imprinted your sacred features on Veronicas veil, stamp them indelibly upon my heart

7th Station
Jesus falls the second time under his cross
O Jesus, by this second fall, keep me from relapse into sin

8th Station
The women of Jerusalem mourn for our Lord
O Jesus, my greatest consolation would be to hear you say “Many sins are forgiven you because you have loved much”

9th Station
Jesus falls the third time under his cross
O Jesus, when weary upon life’s long journey, be my strength and consolation

10th Station
Jesus is stripped of his garments
O Jesus, strip me of all that displeases thee and clothe me with the garb of penance and sorrow for my sins

11th Station
Jesus is nailed to the cross
O Jesus, teach me to forgive injuries and forget them

12th Station
Jesus dies on the cross
My Jesus, you are dying, but your Sacred Heart still throbs with love for your sinful children

13th Station
Jesus is taken down from the cross
Receive me into thy arms, O blessed Mother Mary, and obtain for me pardon for my sins

14th Station
Jesus is placed in the sepulcher
When I receive thee into my heart in holy communion, O Jesus, make it a fit abiding place for your adorable body

We adore you o Christ and we bless you,
Because by your Holy Cross, you have redeemed the world

O Mary conceived without sin,
Pray for us who have recourse to thee

This is some of the portions that thrilled me a lot

Meanwhile something dramatic occurred. I was approached by a seminary, a Presbyterian seminary, and asked if I would teach courses to the seminarians beginning with one Gospel of John seminar. I said, "Sure." So I began to share from the Gospel of John all about the covenant, about the family of God, about what it really means to be born again. I discovered in my study that being born again does not mean accepting Jesus Christ as personal Savior and Lord and asking Him into your heart -- although that is important and every believer, Catholic or otherwise, should have Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord and a living personal relationship with Him. But I discovered what Jesus meant in John 3 when He said that you've got to be born again. He turns around and says that you've got to be born of water and spirit. In the previous chapters He was just baptized with water and the Spirit descended upon Him. And as soon as He is done talking to Nicodemus about the need to be born from water and Spirit, the very next verse says that Jesus and the
disciples went about baptizing. I taught that being born again is a covenant act, a sacrament, a covenant renewal involving baptism. I shared this with my seminary students; they were convinced.

Meanwhile I was preparing my sermons and some lectures ahead of John chapter 3. I was delving into John chapter 6. I don't know how many of you've ever studied the Gospel of John. In many ways it's the richest Gospel of all. But John chapter 6 is my favorite chapter in the fourth Gospel. There I discovered something that I think I read before, but I
never noticed. Listen to it. "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink His blood you have no life in you. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day, for my flesh is food indeed and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him.'" I read that; I reread that; I looked at it from ten different angles. I bought all these books about it, commentaries on John. I couldn't understand how to make sense out of it.

I had been trained to interpret that in a figurative sense; Jesus is using a symbol. Flesh and blood really is just a symbol of His body and blood. But the more I studied, the more I realized that that interpretation makes no sense at all. Why? Because as soon as all the Jews hear what Jesus says, they depart. Up until this point, thousands were following him, and then all of a sudden the multitudes just simply are shocked that He says, "My flesh is food indeed, my blood is drink
indeed" and they all depart. Thousands of disciples leave Him. If Jesus had intended that language to only be figurative, He would have been morally obligated as a teacher to say, "Stop, I only mean it figuratively." But He doesn't do that; instead, what does he do? My research showed me that he turns to the twelve, and he says to them, what? "We better hire a public relations (P.R.) agent; I really blew it guys." No! He says, "Are you going to leave me too?" He doesn't
say, "Do you understand I only meant it as a symbol?" No! He says that the truth is what sets us free, I have taught the truth. What are you going to do about it?

Peter stands up and speaks out; he says, "To whom shall we go? You alone have the words of eternal life and we've come to believe." Peter's statement, "To whom shall we go?" implies that, "You know, Jesus, we don't understand what you mean either, but do you have another Rabbi on the scene you can recommend? You know, to whom shall we go?
It's too late for us; we believe whatever you say even if we don't understand it fully, and if you say we have to eat your flesh and drink your blood, then somehow you'll give us the grace we need to accept your words at face value." He didn't mean it figuratively. As I began to study this, I began to realized it's one thing to convince Presbyterians that being born again means being baptized, but how in the world could I possibly convince them that we actually have to eat His flesh and drink His blood? I focused then a little bit more on the Lord's supper and communion. I discovered that Jesus had never used the word "covenant" in His public ministry. He saved the one time for when He instituted the Eucharist and he said, "This cup is the blood of the new covenant." If covenant means family, what is it that makes us family? Sharing flesh and blood. So if Christ forms a new covenant, that is a new family, what is He going to have to provide us with? New flesh and new blood. I began to see why in the early Church for over 700 years, nobody any place disputed the meaning of Jesus' words. All of the early Church fathers without exception took Jesus'words at face value and believed and taught the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I was scared; I didn't know who to turn to.

Then all of a sudden an episode occurred one night in a seminar I wasn't ready for. An ex-Catholic graduate student named John raised his hand. He had just finished a presentation for the seminar on the Council of Trent. The Council of Trent, you'll recall, was the Church's official response to Martin Luther and the Reformation. In about an hour and a half he had presented the Council of Trent in the most favorable light. He had shown how many of their arguments were in
fact based on the Bible. Then he turned the tables on me. The students were supposed to ask him a question or two. He said, "Can I first ask you a question, Professor Hahn? You know how Luther really had two slogans, not just sola fide, but the second slogan he used to revolt against Rome was sola Scriptura, the Bible alone. My question is, 'Where
does the Bible teach that?'" I looked at him with a blank stare. I could feel sweat coming to my forehead. I used to take pride in asking my professors the most stumping questions, but I never heard this one before. And so I heard myself say words that I had sworn I'd never speak; I said, "John, what a dumb question." He was not intimidated. He look at me and said, "Give me a dumb answer." I said, "All right, I'll try." I just began to wing it. I said, "Well, Timothy 3:16 is the key: 'All Scripture is inspired of God and profitable for correction, for training and righteousness, for reproof that the man of God may be completely equipped for every good work, '" He said, "Wait a second, that only says that Scripture is
inspired and profitable; it doesn't say ONLY Scripture is inspired or even better, only Scripture's profitable for those things. We need other things like prayer," and then he said, "What about 2 Thessalonians 2:15?" I said, "What's that again?" He said, "Well, there Paul tells the Thessalonians that they have to hold fast, they have to cling to the traditions that Paul has taught them either in writing or by word of mouth." Whoa! I wasn't ready. I said, "Well, let's move on with the questions and answers; I'll deal with this next week. Let's go on."

I don't think they realized the panic I was in. When I drove home that night, I was just staring up to the heavens asking God, why have I never heard that question? Why have I never found an answer? The next day I began calling up heologians around the country, former professors. I'd ask them, "Where does the Bible teach sola Scriptura? Where does the Bible teach us that the Bible is our only authority?" One man actually said to me, "What a dumb question coming from you." I said, "Give me a dumb answer then." I was catching on. One professor whom I greatly respect, an Oxford theologian, said to me, "Scott, you don't expect to find the Bible proving sola Scriptura because it isn't something the Bible demonstrates. It is our assumption; it is our presupposition when we approach the Bible." That struck me as odd; I said, "But professor, that seems strange because what we are saying then is that we should only believe what the Bible teaches, but the Bible doesn't teach us to only believe what the Bible teaches. Our assumption isn't taught by the Bible." I said, "That feels like we're cutting off the branch that we're sitting on." Then he said, "Well what other
options do we have?" Good point, all right.

Another friend, a theologian, called me and said, "Scott, what is this I'm hearing that you're considering the Catholic faith?" "Well, no, Art, I'm not really considering the Catholic faith." Then I decided to pose him a question. I said, "Art, what for you is the pillar and foundation of truth?" And he said, "Scott, for all of us Scripture is the pillar and foundation of truth." I said, "Then why, Art, does the Bible say in 1 Timothy 3:15 that the pillar and foundation of truth is
the church, the household of faith?" There was a silence and he said, "Well, Scott, I think you're setting me up with that question then." And I said, "Art, I feel like I'm being set up with lots of problems." He said, "Well, which church, Scott? There are lots of them." I said, "Art, how many churches are even applying for the job of being the pillar and foundation of truth? I mean, if you talk about a church saying, 'We're the pillar and foundation of truth; look to us and you will hear Christ speak and teach'? How many applicants for the job are there? I only know of one. I only know that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that it was founded by Christ; it's been around for 2000 years and it's making some outlandish claims that seem awfully similar to 1 Timothy 3:15."

O boy, there are still some portions in your link, very interesting. The same points we have been here killing fighting ourselves

Dear Catholics,

Do you remember the Sword of Sorrow Simeon prophesied would pierce the heart of our blessed Mother? Can u identify it?

Well, after Jesus had died on the cross and the soldiers came to break the legs of the crucified, one of them pierced his heart with a lance, finding him already dead.

Now Mary was at the foot of the cross while all this happened, and the sight of the lance piercing her dear Jesus broke her heart which was already tortured from having to witness the cruel death of her son. It is said that Mary thus bore the sorrow of that sword piercing her son's heart as Jesus was already dead then.

How courageous, that even in suffering, she escourted him all the way up calvary, even to the foot of the cross, never taking her eyes off her beloved!

Did you know that at the Scourging at the Pillar, Mary wiped his blood from the ground with her garments?

Most Mothers would have stayed home crying. Even more would have presuaded their child not to follow that path of dying for people who didnt care for even themselves.

But Mary not only supported her Son in his quest for our salvation, she assisted him all the way, never faltering!

She is truly the Mother of our Salvation, and I exclaim with  God as delivered by Angel Gabriel: Hail Mary,  full of grace, you have found favour with the Most High" and with the Holy Spirit "blessed are you among women"

Who dares contradict the Almighty?

Glory to Jesus

Honour to Mary

@afam and ricadelide:

many thanks for noting the attitude of some posters especially pilgrim. there seem to be underlying issues involved here. cos if it was a simple case of debating doctrines (well founded ones for that matter), there would be much progress on the thread instead the stagnant repetition of the same points, even after answers have been given.

i must say that one may not agree with answers profered by any other party but the least one can do is acknowledge them, not to make caricatures of them (it is uncouth to say the least).

personally i have answers to some of the questions asked here by pilgrim et al (even from the Bible itself), but until a spirit of civility pervades this thread, i will refrain from posting them.

@ebos:

did you read what the late Fulton Sheen said and i paraphrase, there are not 100 americans who hate the catholic church, many hate their perceptions of what the catholic church is.

Pls. let's be civil and have a jolly time.

Dominus Vobiscum

@Carlosein

I don’t think there is anything you will answer Pilgrim that we have not given in some other threads. I conversed with Pilgrim in the thread 666 and another on Catholic is not a Church but a Modernized Way of Idolatry.

So, that was why I didn’t offer answers to a few of her questions in this thread. I provided answers to her questions on the above mentioned threads but the Pilgrim whom I have taken as a friend didn’t believe any atom rather she has kept on asking the same questions all over again. She will not agree with you, but the only thing in her you may like is one particular attribute.

However, I read your link it was very nice. I can’t understand why most Protestants choose to write rubbish against Catholicism – twisting everything for what purpose? It amazes me to see them behaving this way.

@Carlosein,

Carlosein:

@afam and ricadelide:

many thanks for noting the attitude of some posters especially pilgrim.

My dear, I have no underlying issues with anyone - Catholics and/or Protestants. If you notice, I deliberately refrained from posting anything right from my rejoinder to Afam's - just to observe IF indeed you guys cannot resit the urge to be so dubious. If anyone has issues, what is the meaning of your duplicity here by trying to force "issues" into my stance simply because you have sanctimoniously looked the other way and pretended it was a good thing indeed for your own Catholic brigand to refer to others as "ants" and "devil"? Catholics have used all sorts of bedevilled language on me - and I usually held my peace because my peace is NEVER disturbed by self-defeatist bootlickers. The only time you see me respond with a no-nonsense attitude is when you chaps slave yourselves on your hypocrisy and scoot away to try and backslap one another after trying to castigate fellow Christians simply because they're not Catholics!

Even then, you have further exposed your hypocrisy - for where did ricadelide "note" the attitude of "some posters" especially pilgrim? Just when did this strong intoxicating wine of doublespeak and derelict solicitation with Catholics assume a new face?

I've said it again - my message is clear: Catholics, behave! QED.  If you want to see me keep my word, try these experiments:

   (a) use your strongest aspersions on pilgrim.1 - she won't bulge; such issues have never distracted me one bit,
        and you won't see me here for a while. WHY? Not because by resorting to such, the users therefore would
         have "chased" me away; but rather because I don't react to people's frustrations who resort to such whimpers,
         and would not want to leave them seriously damamged;

   (b) the moment you use such suggested and bedevilled language on other Christians, you will see me here in a
        jiffy! WHY? Because I have zero tolerance to Catholic hypocrisies that pretend they preach "love" to others
        while at the same time referring to them as "devils".

It's all up to you. If you want me out of this thread (I was done with it earlier), then behave yourselves. I don't care that much if you admit once and for all that Mary is your GOD.

But if you want me in to frequently bring you round your worst nightmares, then do either or two things: (a) continue in your Catholic sanctimonious hypocricies; or (b) forget me and then resume your bedevilled language on other Christians. It's not a matter of personal issues to me; but you've all got to grow up, sit up and get done with this Romish doublefaced cathedral drama.

So, which is it going to be?

Cheers.

@ebos,

ebos:

@Carlosein

I don’t think there is anything you will answer Pilgrim that we have not given in some other threads. I conversed with Pilgrim in the thread 666 and another on Catholic is not a Church but a Modernized Way of Idolatry.

My dear friend, I've had no issues with you from the very first when I engaged a discussion with yourself. We may not agree on so many issues - I've held discussions with quite a lot of folks and seen good repertoire with them. But the one thing that is on record is what I keep repeating endlessly: Catholics should respect others and drop their hypocricies about a "love" they preach but don't have!

I've always held back from pushing issues - not even responding in like manner when Catholics have assailed me with all sorts of names. The one thing that you will find is that ever since Catholics started castigating other Christians, pilgrim.1 first warned them - and on confirmation that they refused to behave or take heed, I've sought to bring them round their own pottage.

I also earlier appealed to you to talk to your brethren to behave. I'm surprised that you of all people, ebos, said absolutely nothing to this unfortunate trend. . . as if you had a secret, gleeful enjoyment of your brethren castigating others. I'm not related to you in any way; but if I saw someone trampling on your dignity as a Christian, you will find me rise to the challenge, even where I don't respond to anyone slurring my person.

Dear ebos, I've sought to respect you guys, especially you. But sadly, I don't place friendship above integrity. If the Catholic Church has built a reputation of mind-bungling histories for herself, and some Catholics here would mistake their poor commission of continuing the same, I'm sorry they would have to be brought round to face up to the real issues that connect us all as Christians.

If Catholics cannot respect others, tough luck - they should not whimper at being served their own porridge, until they start behaving themselves.

Cheers.

@pilgrim
your tirade on this thread makes me see that Catholics must be very patient people. you should try to understand that a difference in faith is allowed. variety is the spice that makes the world go round. Live and let live, haba. Its not like your brouhaha is going to change anything so why not just let it go, or better yet, create another thread. Afterall the thread title that brought me here is "A forum for true Catholics". You're obviously not one so go away. Some of us are actually curious about Catholicism and though we're not looking to convert, we'd rather hear from the horses mouth.

@Pilgrim,

I’m now blamed for the actions of others as if I have put the actions of other Protestants on you. It is on record that the Protestants have been doing the attacks while Catholics have been on defense, though had to come back with few counter attacks. When the attacks from Protestants become increasingly intense, I don’t think it’s proper to restrain my fellow Catholics from showing their displeasure. But, what I don’t support is when you are insulted directly.

We can go back to the beginning of this thread. The first attack was launched by a Protestant and it has been so in every other thread. They have attributed so many names on Catholicism such as Mariolatry, Idolatrous, and all Popes as the Beast etc. All explanations by Catholics made no sense.

You don’t expect me to respond to every post - apart from these Catholic threads– I don’t respond to people except few guys I have known to have been contributing wisely. So, when they have gone overboard, I will respond to call them to order because you can’t see them coming back to insult you.

However, I have never engaged in any debate in Nairaland except with you. If the insult from your fellow Protestants continues this way, I will have no other option than stop visiting this thread or even Nairaland. It helps to remove discomfort I have been encountering in the course of reading some stuffs.

Regards

@marissa,

marissa:

@pilgrim
your tirade on this thread makes me see that Catholics must be very patient people. you should try to understand that a difference in faith is allowed.

With all due respect, please have the grace to be objective. Why are you guys pretending that Catholics have not done worse than you're here pretending to notice in my repostes? Where were you guys when Catholics assailed pilgrim.1 and she said next to nothing? If on the other hand I refuse to be silent at the unwarranted aspersions of Catholics against others, what is your worry? Would you rather that it were just the grandest thing for Catholics to refer to others as "devil" and even YOU marissa would have nothing to say thereto?

Look, I know you meant well; but please don't try to pretend not to notice about Catholics being so sanctimoniously uncivil when discussing with non-Catholics.

marissa:

variety is the spice that makes the world go round.

I agree - but that variety does not warrant my insinuating that you're a "devil".

marissa:

Live and let live, haba. Its not like your brouhaha is going to change anything so why not just let it go, or better yet, create another thread.

I wonder what you were doing here - e dey hard you to create thread on your own?

marissa:

Afterall the thread title that brought me here is "A forum for true Catholics".

Make una take style dey talk true. . . please check again at the thread title - perhaps you arrived at the wrong place!

marissa:

You're obviously not one so go away.

I hear - as soon as you guys behave, behave, behave, pilgrim.1 won't be here. You pretend your sanctimonious hypocrisy and address me, I'll be here as well.

marissa:

Some of us are actually curious about Catholicism and though we're not looking to convert, we'd rather hear from the horses mouth.

Hard luck - they are more strangers to truth and reason than you had hoped for. Enjoy and see if you won't prove this assertions!

Glory to Jesus

Honour to Mary

@ebos,

ebos:

I’m now blamed for the actions of others as if I have put the actions of other Protestants on you. It is on record that the Protestants have been doing the attacks while Catholics have been on defense, though had to come back with few counter attacks. When the attacks from Protestants become increasingly intense, I don’t think it’s proper to restrain my fellow Catholics from showing their displeasure. But, what I don’t support is when you are insulted directly.

I haven't blamed you for anything, and I don't expect you would stand aside and enjoy the banters. I see that as highly irresponsible for any friend of mine to behave that way. If anyone tried to assail me, you would notice I often do not waste my time replying such - for the simple reason that I might leave them even more damaged than they started: and a few of you know me for that! But to sit back and watch any "Christian" castigating another Christian is something we have a responsibility to discourage as best we could. I've asked that you talk to your brethren; but to come back and read your confirmation of my suspicion that you sat back to enjoy the banters. . . haa!! You shame me, ebos!

ebos:

We can go back to the beginning of this thread. The first attack was launched by a Protestant and it has been so in every other thread. They have attributed so many names on Catholicism such as Mariolatry, Idolatrous, and all Popes as the Beast etc. All explanations by Catholics made no sense.

One kweshun: did pilgrim.1 sit back to enjoy the banters - or did she at least try to do something to discourage the unpleasantries? Please just try and honestly think things through.

ebos:

You don’t expect me to respond to every post - apart from these Catholic threads– I don’t respond to people except few guys I have known to have been contributing wisely. So, when they have gone overboard, I will respond to call them to order because you can’t see them coming back to insult you.

I'm sorry that I didn't see you make the much needed effort to discourage Catholics misbehaving in all the threads where they have shown unfortunately acrid attitudes. I'm not being accusative here; but a few of those times I noticed you came on the Forum, sat back to enjoy the scenes, and made no remarks. You're not obliged to; but I don't see the sense in anyone complaining and saying all sorts at this point just because Catholics have been served their own capuccino.

It is on record that the several times Catholics have said nasty things to me and about me, I didn't respond to them in like manner. It really gets me going when people who say they preach "love" are the same ones who use hate-speech in addressing others; and when I call attention to such, y'all pretend to look the other way and complain that pilgrim.1 is engaging in tirades. Please.

ebos:

However, I have never engaged in any debate in Nairaland except with you.

That's true - and did we have any difficulties holding good dialogue?

ebos:

If the insult from your fellow Protestants continues this way, I will have no other option than stop visiting this thread or even Nairaland. It helps to remove discomfort I have been encountering in the course of reading some stuffs.

See what amazes me? My dear ebos, this is why we will never get anywhere - because you guys always draw such a thick line between "Catholics" and "Protestants". When are we going to start appreciating ourselves as "Christians", ehn?

That is why I don't wait to find out if someone is "Catholic" or "Protestant" before appealing to them to be cordial to other discussants. It's that simple: let's care enough to look beyond our denominational lines and talk to one another! If we can't do that, are we then waiting for non-Christians to come in here and clean up our poo? Why is it so tough for Christians to see beyond the "me-Catholic and you-damned Protestant" lines?

All the same calm down and best regards.

@Pilgrim.1
I have noticed the slight change of tone in your last two or three postings, it is my hope that it is a sign of things to come. With regard to the your reply to my post, it would do you good to re-read it. I clearly called on you and the so-called Catholics, don't tell me you did not notice it. I notice Marissa has also called on you to lay down your weapons, you are inadvertently making the Catholics look good. Why do you allow them to dictate how you'd react? Why not be your own person? Finally, why not allow everyone to do their own thing until that day of days when Christ would sort everyone out? Haba, does your own vision of Christianity preclude freedom of opinions and ideas?
Abeg, cool down. I know Jesus loves you as much as he loves the other person, remember Christ is more about LOVE than the things you and your friends are squabbling about here.

@ebos, carlosein and other of my brethren

Glory to Jesus!!! Please answer me

I dey kampe. I just felt like relaxing because there is no need arguing, when you know that they already know the truth, but accepting is the problem. The time i will use to do important things i don't want to waste it in argument.
Jesus has given us the option to chose between life and death, he is not forcing anyone, but he said i prefer you chose life.
So the things of God is not by force.

Carlosein thats a very nice post.

Glory to Jesus!!! Honour to our Mother Mary.

Thanks oby.

but on a serious note, i don't want anyone to look at this as if any party wants to really win at the expense of the other (either catholic or otherwise). we have to admit a lot of things were wrong in the catholic church (please my brothers and sisters don't stone me oh!), especially in the actions of some overzealous individuals in the cathoilic church. all i find hard to understand is how this can be ascribed to the doctrines of the catholic church.

note also that the late Pontiff Pope John Paull II, apologized publicly for these wrongs (and as ebos said, they have not stopped referring to it as a pointer to the church being evil) personally, i think they could have seen his apologies as a sign of the humble man Karol Woztyla was trying to be (that is if you think he was not) by apologizing for the evils he mostly did not personally commit (and i do not know if he personally committed any).

Pilgrim.1 oftentimes i've had discussions with christians (yes true simple and trying to be holy christians!) and especially non-catholics and let me tell you one major thing we've always agreed on.
trying to prove/show that the catholic church is wrong has a backlashing effect which is that you would have only succeeded in proving/showing that christianity is wrong.

pls take a second to think about what i say and see if i make sense to you.

there are no prizes for proving/showing the above rather i think that infact we displease God almighty the more.
if any catholics have insulted non-catholics (here or elsewhere) then i apologize on their behalf (believe me pilgrim it is what the catholic church taught me and continues to teach).

"Pace Christi in Regnum Christi-the peace of Christ in the kingdom of Christ", Amen.

@Atam-Man,

Atam-Man:

@Pilgrim.1
I have noticed the slight change of tone in your last two or three postings, it is my hope that it is a sign of things to come.

I do pray that it came across to you in a positive way.

Atam-Man:

With regard to the your reply to my post, it would do you good to re-read it. I clearly called on you and the so-called Catholics, don't tell me you did not notice it. I notice Marissa has also called on you to lay down your weapons, you are inadvertently making the Catholics look good. Why do you allow them to dictate how you'd react?

Lol. . . I no fit laff! Me make the Catholics look good? No, they simple sat up by my reactions - and if anyone wants to see the very ugly side of our Catholic friends, believe me, I could simply take them to the relevant pages. I was quiet for quite a while because at first the aspersions were directed at me; and it's not my style to react to people's frustrations at themselves. But my hard stance was only recent - when I read a new trend in Catholics trying to castigate others simply because they happened to be non-Catholics.

Atam-Man:

Why not be your own person? Finally, why not allow everyone to do their own thing until that day of days when Christ would sort everyone out? Haba, does your own vision of Christianity preclude freedom of opinions and ideas?

Atam, try and go back and see that I'm not the sort of person to push anything. I'm my own unique person, and I'm glad that not many people could imitate piulgrim.1 if they wanted to, lol. (kidding). Anyhow, I've always left people to their own say; but I'm still zero tolerant to rascals with a "Christian" badge slurring other Christians.

Atam-Man:

Abeg, cool down. I know Jesus loves you as much as he loves the other person, remember Christ is more about LOVE than the things you and your friends are squabbling about here.

I don cool down since - and I don't read anywhere that the love of Christ would make a "Christian" refer to others as "devil": that is simply unwarranted; and if we do nothing about it early enough, it might go to levels that are unforseen.

Enjoy.

@Carlosein,

Carlosein:

Pilgrim.1 oftentimes i've had discussions with christians (yes true simple and trying to be holy christians!) and especially non-catholics and let me tell you one major thing we've always agreed on.
trying to prove/show that the catholic church is wrong has a backlashing effect which is that you would have only succeeded in proving/showing that christianity is wrong.

please take a second to think about what i say and see if i make sense to you.

there are no prizes for proving/showing the above rather i think that infact we displease God almighty the more.
if any catholics have insulted non-catholics (here or elsewhere) then i apologize on their behalf (believe me pilgrim it is what the catholic church taught me and continues to teach).

"Pace Christi in Regnum Christi-the peace of Christ in the kingdom of Christ", Amen.

Where would I start from? Lol. . okay, here:

I meant bizness when I left you guys the suggested experiment. I would not have bothered posting a single line if any Catholic came back with vitriol against me; but if bedevilled language was used on others, I surely would have surfaced again.

However, in one line, I hear you: no wahala. All I wanted was for people to just show a bit of decorum in discussing. What softens my heart is that from the very onset, I've noticed you have a calm and respectful attitude in this thread. In closing, I apologise to you (and all others who are willing to receive it) if my repostes have been quite unsettling to you. I may not agree with your convictions; but I do hope that I would not be back here in a hurry to role up my sleeves on any rascals in da house. If I do, tough luck! hehehe. . ._{it's not a threat, abeg O - me I no fit deck nobody!}

Enjoy. . . and much blessings.

Carlosein, Obyi and others

I heard you guys. But one thing, don't wait for kindness to grace you, grace kindness with your presence. I understand that any good accomplished at the expense of harmony is a doubtful gain. It is to the credit of human nature, that, except where its selfishness is brought into play, it loves more readily than it hates. I then state here that thoughtful, by a gradual and quiet process, will even be transformed to reasoning, unless the change be impeded by a continually new irritation of the original feeling of aggression.

I believe in my heart that knowledge exploration is key for all of us but especially for our good, and to keep their futures open-ended and never ending is really, really important.

Let me just continue with what I was immersed at my childhood. I know nothing get me distracted except that I believe.

Best Regards to you all.

Cheers, ebos.

Yes, cheers to all indeed.

Jesu Ufam Tobie: Jesus i trust in You.

You are the Light of the world.

Be our Light, Amen.

Pardon me, I have some 'issues' to address.

Carlosein:

but on a serious note, i don't want anyone to look at this as if any party wants to really win at the expense of the other (either catholic or otherwise). we have to admit a lot of things were wrong in the catholic church (please my brothers and sisters don't stone me oh!), especially in the actions of some overzealous individuals in the cathoilic church.

Fine. Granted.

Carlosein:

all i find hard to understand is how this can be ascribed to the doctrines of the catholic church.

Now i have to disagree here. I don't think this has been the case on this thread, and there's no need to try to use an excusable point (raised above) to cloud the issue in the hope of still preserving a reputation. that's a false analogy and an appeal to steer the debate away from the real issues. I don't think quotes from catholic websites on the official doctrinal positions conflicting with what the bible clearly teaches constitutes examples of individual overzealousness, rather what might be closer to home is a general 'overzealousness' of the entire leadership (and yes, that's a polite way of not saying the church).
Is it right to ascribe, say, the Pope-sanctioned crusades by overzealous individuals to a doctrine of the catholic church? Perhaps, no. (i doubt if the church would put this into writing though: "a holy war must be fought to spread the gospel" or something like that, right?) However, is it right to ascribe the false confidence or lack therof (and perhaps eventual perdition) meted out to millions of people to a doctrine of the catholic church (purgatory)? Yes. And the real point is, and i wont mince words, it (the doctrine) is wrong.
Now i seem to notice a word you used: "wrong in the catholic church" (that, i guess, is to prevent from using "with"?) and that's where you are missing the whole point. A lot of churches (perhaps every) have lots of things wrong in them, but the churches themselves aren't foundationally wrong. Jesus only had two faultless churches out of seven in the book of Revelations - but the rest five were still his churches. However when a church's core doctrines are fundamentally flawed (as has been repeatedly shown on this thread, will be shown in the next few paragraphs - and can still be shown if required) then there's something wrong with that church, and if one wants to be really fair, one has to take a hard and objective look at those issues.

Carlosein:

Pilgrim.1 oftentimes i've had discussions with christians (yes true simple and trying to be holy christians!) and especially non-catholics and let me tell you one major thing we've always agreed on.
trying to prove/show that the catholic church is wrong has a backlashing effect which is that you would have only succeeded in proving/showing that christianity is wrong.

Now the statement in bold was what really invited a response from me. My mind might be wondering which christians would agree to that, but let me try to understand their rationale; maybe proving that the catholic church is wrong might be putting it too pointedly. Perhaps the better phrasing would be that many of the core doctrines of the catholic church is wrong.
however, the correlation between proving/showing that many of the catholic church's doctrines are wrong and invariably or in so doing proving/showing that christianity is wrong is lost on me. The point is: who or what defines christianity? What is the yardstick for identifying right or wrong within christianity? Are we saying that by definition there can't be wrong within christianity? Even in the early church a lot of things went wrong. How then do we iron things out when things don't align?
The answers to those issues will determine a lot of things. It is fairly obvious that, to prevent things from going out of hand, there has to be an unchanging 'rule', a trustworthy reference point. Now, if i come here and say straight out of the blue: "sola scriptura", some here would say "hey, the bible is not complete" or "there are mistakes in the bible" or even, "we have to follow the traditions of the church" and so on. Are those statements justifiable? What have they resulted in? A lack of accountability - because anything and everything can be explained away as being a product of a particular person's 'revelation' from God or a 'tradition' of the church (might i say, leadership?) - since the axiom is "the bible is not complete".
If there could be traditions (and even doctrines) whimsically churned up by the leadership, who then can question them, if they don't have to be in agreement to the Word? How do we determine that they are wrong? What happens when we have misguided leadership as has been repeatedly shown to be the case in the past? Are the leadership intrinsically above mistakes? Even Peter had issues at some point (see Gal. 2:11) If then the leadership can be wrong, what happens to the 'dogmas' they define? How does one explain for example the fairly recent (1950) doctrine about the assumption of the virgin Mary (which the Word does not teach)? Or how do you explain a situation where people become the designers of Truth and doctrine (rather than God through his Word) as was the case with the millions of signatories pressuring the late Pope John Paul II to declare Mary as Co-Redemptrix - again, clearly against the scriptures? (Acts 4:12, 2Tim 2:5) Or even the (again recent) statement about the 'Immaculate Conception' of Mary, when the bible says 'all have sinned' (Rom. 3;23)?
The questions and issues that can arise are endless, and just as Carlosein is making apologies for now commonly accepted past mis-doings of the church, some will still do so in the future - if there continues the trend of not having any fixed and unchanging yardstick for establishing Truth. There are many statements by God Himself however to the contrary, perhaps this one would suffice;
[center]To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. (Isaiah 8:20)[/center]the bible, the word of God, is the unchanging yardstick. If that is not foundational with (or to) the catholic church, then something is foundationally wrong.

So in summary let me reiterate: the reason the catholic church gets a lot of things repeatedly wrong is because they have not clearly taken a stand to commit to the rule-book, and to get rid of any inconsistencies (and, quite frankly, i doubt if they can or are even willing to). Rather my appeal would be that each individual, like the berean christians in Acts 17:11, go and check out these things in the scriptures to see what is true.

Where true christianity (and by this term i'm not referring to any particular organization per se) fundamentally differs from Roman Catholicsm is its commitment to that unchanging principle, to that reference point; and that is what ultimately undermines your argument. If the catholic church continually refuses to align itself without reservations to what ultimately defines what constitutes true christianity, the unchanging Word, then there hardly remains any substantive correlation between it (the church) and christianity. If anything, pointing out the errors with the former only bears out the fact that there is something called true christianity - as it must be willing and ready to distance itself from any form of falsehood.
Its not about professions (or, as the case may be, confessions), anybody can do that; its about obedience to that which is written (Matt.7:21). Cheers .

I went to visit a friend one evening at one of those Late Idahosa's church
and i laughed myself hoarse when i saw the picture of the late pastor hanging
on the wall of the church.
My question to the guy and his church members was 'If with just one leader dead
you have his picture in your church,when your church gets to 500years with thousands of leaders dead,how many pictures will you have on your church walls.How come you
make pics and videos of pastors, wives and your family and friends and you dont call that images
It is funny to me that Protestants pretend to not know that pictures,videos,paintings etc are all images.If you keep anybody's picture,have you not made or kept an image?
literary and out-of-context interpretation of the scripture is unfortunate

@alliednetw,

I don't know what made you laugh; but did you ask your friend if the members of Idahosa's church also bow down and pray to the pictures and videos of Idahosa? If you think they did so, then again I'd like to ask you: is that what the Lord asked Christians to do?

Please make another visit and let us know when Christians started bowing down to and praying to pictures and videos of Idahosa. We dey wait.

Cheers.

@ricadelide,

ricadelide:

However when a church's core doctrines are fundamentally flawed (as has been repeatedly shown on this thread, will be shown in the next few paragraphs - and can still be shown if required) then there's something wrong with that church, and if one wants to be really fair, one has to take a hard and objective look at those issues.

Well, I just hope that our friends here would have the grace to open the Bible and let God speak to their hearts. You've yet captured the real essence of the discussions in this thread. Examining what one believes as a 'Christian' in the light of God's WORD is a responsibility we all owe ourselves - and there's really no reason why anyone would be averse to that, unless they understand already that their ideologies are fundamentally flawed when held up to Scripture.


Anyhow, how body? I trust you're enjoying your weekend. Bless.

@Pilgrim.1
I thought you said you were ready for a truce ! Why are you so bent on 'converting' a people who already believe in God? Are there no non-Christians around you? What is this obsession with the Catholicism? Leave these people alone to do what they want to do with their topic on this forum. BTW, you remind me of the things I have come to dislike about some of those who claim to be Christians. You definitely give me reasons to compare you, once again, to the Taliban, abeg cool down. Why are you so belligerent about the things of God?
Remember what Gamaliel told his colleagues in the Sanhedrin cf: Acts 34ff? Please show some trust in this your God, leave the Catholics to him to sort out. Haba, are you God's avenging angel?
@All Catholics here
There is every chance Pilgrim.1 is nothing but a religion-minded wind-up merchant who is out to get you guys worked up. Why not learn to ignore her rantings and go ahead with whatever you guys want to do here?
@ All
Where were all of you when the crooks carted away the national treasures of Nigerians? Stop this IGG and go about the worship of your God. The day all those who claim to be Christians in Nigeria can come unto to the streets to protest against bad leadership, I'd begin to take your IGG and posturings serious; even a blatant thief like OBJ got the support of some Christians in Nigeria . Let me stop before I get tempted to write a treatise on the type of Christianity in Nigeria

Let me try to answer for pilgrim because i'm sure if she replies she'd still be accused of 'attacking' people.

Atam-Man:

@Pilgrim.1
I thought you said you were ready for a truce !

whoever told you there was a war?

Why are you so bent on 'converting' a people who already believe in God? Are there no non-Christians around you? What is this obsession with the Catholicism? Leave these people alone to do what they want to do with their topic on this forum.

And may i ask what your 'obsession' with pilgrim is? When did believing in God become a significant criterion for anything? Have you gone to the prisons to find out the percentage of inmates that 'believe in God'? Did Cornelius not believe in God? Why then was Peter still sent to convert him? And do you think it is only 'christians' that believe in God? Why then must we discuss with non-christians - especially if they already 'believe in God'?
Morever who said this is 'their' topic? Have you read the original post? When did discussion become an anathema, especially considering the decorum that has been shown here?
Bros, if you don't have anything to contribute you can move on. You appear to be the kind of person that'd see a friend walking into a ditch, and rather than warn the person, would encourage the one to walk faster.

BTW, you remind me of the things I have come to dislike about some of those who claim to be Christians. You definitely give me reasons to compare you, once again, to the Taliban, abeg cool down. Why are you so belligerent about the things of God?

If Pilgrim had spoken the way you've spoken in the few posts you've made (with the accusations and all), i wonder if there would have been a discussion at all on this thread. Its so easy to accuse another when one has not dealt with himself. Why are you so belligerent about not demonstrating any maturity?

Remember what Gamaliel told his colleagues in the Sanhedrin cf: Acts 34ff?

And what has this got to do with anything? Have you applied the injunction in verse 38 to yourself? Or you've rather decided to take the whip as in verse 40 - because according to you, no one must speak in the name of Jesus.

Please show some trust in this your God, leave the Catholics to him to sort out.

Just like the Pope has left non-catholics eh? The hypocrisy you're manifesting is seething.

Haba, are you God's avenging angel?

In fact, i can see the ruins and devastation from the burning sulphur that she has rained down on catholics in this forum.

There is every chance Pilgrim.1 is nothing but a religion-minded wind-up merchant

Very nice. Thanks for restraining yourself.

@all,
why is it so hard to discuss? Perhaps that has been the genesis of lots of problems in christianity - because everyone is so afraid to hold what they believe to scrutiny. Is it that we have skeletons in our cupboard that we're afraid will be exposed? Whatever happened to the example set by Paul, and others, who reasoned with fellow-jews, greeks, christians etc (Paul - Acts. 17;2, Acts 18:19, Acts 19;8, Apollos - Acts 18:26-28, 1Pet. 3:15, etc)? Some of us argue with atheists, agnostics, muslims etc - what's the grand barrier that prevents arguing and discussing with fellow christians? Is that to say we can't have disagreements? That we can't correct each other? Even Paul had to confront Peter at a point (Gal. 2:11). If anything, iron sharpens iron (Prov. 27:17).
Furthermore, even God himself invites us to discussion (Is 1:18)
Please let's stop this habit of always resorting to pleas of 'we're being attacked' - especially when that is not the case. This is a discussion forum, if you only had to discuss with people who agree with you 100% what would be learnt?
Cheers all .

@ricadelide
Bring it on!
You sign in here complaining about posts that dare to suggest that you should rein in your attitude , yet you are quick to notice the non-sequiturs in another person's posts.
One of the main planks of public foras is the readiness to see the wisdom in the positions of those you are engaging with, I'd dare to say that I am yet to find nuggets of wisdom in your last post or indeed in the bits previously posted by you that I have been able to read. Please read the following lines carefully and prayerfully, before you choose to shoot off another vitriolic reply.
About the Pope, does your idea of Love and peacefull co-existence suggest that you should visit the alleged iniquities (in your eyes) of the Pope on the other Catholics on this board? Are you sure you really care about Christ? Is this the attitude Christ would have displayed? Remember the root of the word "Christian"? It was used to describe those who were Christ-like, please why are you reducing the power of that word by this belligerent attitude?
On another note, why this impish joy in the fact that some people are going to burn in Hell? On the contrary, why not rejoice in your own salvation and continually pray for the salvation of those you contrive to see as unredeemed?
Lest I forget, it remains my view that some of you the 'so-called Christians' make me and many others want to welcome the Taliban with open arms, their notoriety could pale into insignificance in the face of what your type carry around.
Finally, move an inch out of what your comfort zone and you would come see that all of us who call ourselves Christian should be less strident in face of the age of the some of the non-Christian Religions. Some of these existed at least 2 to 5 thousand years before the coming of Christ? Another point you might want to reflect on is the fact that Christianity as a Religion does predate the Bible that we shall be reading in Church today.