kkins25:
christianity is my favorite religion and for good reason.
there were Christians before the Roman catholic what-ever. so where does christians sinful for marrying underaged girls or not. Yes or No?

You need to pay close attention!..

What I tell you of Christianity isn't that which was put together in the doctrines and traditions of the Romans and Constantine cooked up that I spewing of, but instead what is recorded in the Greek texts as the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ Himself that I refer to. Again, Jesus Christ is the Christ in the word Christianity and it is because His followers lived according to them that they were called "Christians" .

Now, according to Jesus Christ, marriage is between a man and a woman... obviously children are not considered for marriage is you follow that law. I gave you a scripture reference to look up on that, didn't I? .

kkins25:
christianity is my favorite religion and for good reason.

Given that the only religion that is true and pure, without flaws or faults and such that has God's approval is not Christianity, is not Islam, is not Hinduism, is not Buddhism, is not ATF, is not New Age, is not atheism, is not football, is not fashion, is not basketball, is not hockey, then whats your reason for adopting it as your favourite, then?

kkins25:
there were Christians before the Roman catholic what-ever.

Acts 11:26
After finding Saul, Barnabas brought him back to Antioch.
Barnabas and Saul met with the church in Antioch for a whole year and taught a large group of people.
The disciples were called Christians for the first time in the city of Antioch.

Acts 26:27-29
27Then Paul said to Agrippa, “Do you believe what the prophets said? I know you do.”
28Agrippa asked Paul,
“In such a short time do you think you can talk me into being a Christian?”
29Paul answered,
“Whether it takes a short time or a long time, I wish you and everyone else who hears me today would become just like me!
Except, of course, for these chains.”

Of course, there were strongly negative term of contempt word Christians, long used by the people of Antioch before Christianity, the Roman catholic what-ever invention. Now did you notice what Apostle Paul did there at Acts 26:29 to King Agrippa's disparaging insinuation?

kkins25:
so where does christians sinful for marrying underaged girls or not. Yes or No?

Sin or sinful, as you have used it, from a Hebrew concept, actually means missing the mark, in fact, its means, missing God's standard. Now that you have moved your argument from nine year olds to underaged girls, I am happy to inform you that God doesnt see anything good in having carnal knowledge with such minors

kkins25:
Stone age? when did consent laws really start to get momentum?? just two to three centuries ago.

Why not travel through time into the past, if you're so that penchant about the status quo two to three centuries ago then

kkins25:
what about the holy christian men that married at that age, surely you are aware it was tradition.

I would very much like you, to show its, in the bible, the names and places of the holy christian men that married at that age, making your argument on the basis that it was tradition.

kkins25:
In summary, NNTR says YES while Kobo says NO.

Unless you have a convincing reason why two faithful to each other consenting adult should not love each other until death do part them, then put up or shut up. Live and let live.

kkins25:
Christianity shiit. Good Content.

Christianity ṣhit, from day one, stank to high heaven.

_{Personal text: Jesus is not a theologian. He is God who told stories.}

Kobojunkie:
You need to pay close attention!..

What I tell you of Christianity is not which was put together in the doctrines and traditions of the Romans and Constantine cooked up but instead what is recorded in the Greek texts.

Now, according to Jesus Christ, marriage is between a man and a woman... obviously children are not considered for marriage is you follow that law. I gave you a scripture reference to look up on that, didn't I? .

Why are you always disparaging the “doctrines and traditions” of men while venerating the Bible?
Isn’t it men who wrote, edited, and compiled, and edited, and edited, and edited….……the bible?

http://www.ntcanon.org/Carthage.canon.shtml
The Canon approved by the third Synod of Carthage (397 CE)

The first council that accepted the present New Testament canon was the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393 CE); however, the acts of the council are lost. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the third Synod of Carthage.

Canon 24. Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read in church under the name of divine Scriptures. Moreover, the canonical Scriptures are these: [then follows a list of Old Testament books]. The [books of the] New Testament: the Gospels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles, one book; the Epistles of Paul, thirteen; of the same to the Hebrews; one Epistle; of Peter, two; of John, apostle, three; of James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation of John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church shall be consulted. On the anniversaries of martyrs, their acts shall also be read.
Note that Hebrews is listed separately from the other 13 epistles.
According to Zahn, in 419 another Synod held at Carthage gave the concluding words in the following form:

... Fourteen Epistles of Paul ..... the Revelation of John, one book. Let this be sent to our brother and fellow-bishop, Boniface [of Rome], and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things that we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

KnownUnknown:


Why are you always disparaging the “doctrines and traditions” of men while venerating the Bible?
Isn’t it men who wrote, edited, and compiled, and edited, and edited, and edited….……the bible?

http://www.ntcanon.org/Carthage.canon.shtml
The Canon approved by the third Synod of Carthage (397 CE)

The first council that accepted the present New Testament canon was the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393 CE); however, the acts of the council are lost. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the third Synod of Carthage.

Canon 24. Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read in church under the name of divine Scriptures. Moreover, the canonical Scriptures are these: [then follows a list of Old Testament books]. The [books of the] New Testament: the Gospels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles, one book; the Epistles of Paul, thirteen; of the same to the Hebrews; one Epistle; of Peter, two; of John, apostle, three; of James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation of John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church shall be consulted. On the anniversaries of martyrs, their acts shall also be read.
Note that Hebrews is listed separately from the other 13 epistles.
According to Zahn, in 419 another Synod held at Carthage gave the concluding words in the following form:

... Fourteen Epistles of Paul ..... the Revelation of John, one book. Let this be sent to our brother and fellow-bishop, Boniface [of Rome], and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things that we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

You dey mind am? He acts as if God delivered the book to him HIMSELF.

AntiChristian:
Damojoy Make i go call the Christian brothers to come explain ds for us!

Rosement, MaxInDHouse, achorladey, Myer, antiislam, advocatejare, rightchannel, Hashabiah, Obelemy, Originakalokalo, Kobojunkie, true2god, thorpido, malvisguy212, Agbegbaorogboye, okeyglm, Dtruthspeaker, tsinzu, innotutorial, zoer, Steep, Hendtime, truthissupreme, dstvee, jesusjnr2020, lesbiconverter, trutht828, Enilove, sagenaija, Righteousness2

HendTime is back, y'all foolish abdools are in trouble again