NewStats: 3,264,173 , 8,182,864 topics. Date: Tuesday, 10 June 2025 at 02:25 AM 3a3q12

Steep:
can you show me which of the church has ever had issues with Paul's epistle just one?

Jesus Christ! Can't you see that even Peter had to address the issue of Paul and even commented that some of the things he teaches are hard to understand, and that as a result, some people wrest it to the detriment of their souls as they do the other scriptures? Paul himself at different occasions has had the need to defend his apostleship. In most of his epistles, there are chapters wholly dedicated to defending his apostleship. Paul's matters are not of today!

You just itted that can or pfn do not have the authority over people's faith and at the same time acting as authority over Abel damina, does this not show hypocrisy?
Heresy is not a matter of individual opinion, else you just fall into the error of subjectivity which you are grappling with.

In what way did they act as authority over Abel Damina's faith? They asked him to stop misleading people on clear matters of faith! Simple! Matters that are generally believed and accepted by all believers.

Historically and from the scriptures the new testament church do not have tithing as a doctrine and it has never being a debate.

It is currently a debate. The new testament church is discussing the issue right now all over the world with different opinions coming to the surface.

Your attempt at placing tithing on same footing with denying scripture is ridiculous.

Is tithing not scripture? Has anyone ever learnt about tithing in a university? Is it not from the Bible that we all get to know about tithing?

You claim pfn and can are no authority over individual faith and yet they could act as authority over abel's faith

Show me how they have acted as authority over Damina's faith. If Damina is not teaching others what is considered entirely anti-scripture by all Christians worldwide, would anyone have to call him out? He should keep his heresies to himself and not corrupt the body with his leaven of falsehood.

GothamCities:


Jesus Christ! Can't you see that even Peter had to address the issue of Paul and even commented that some of the things he teaches are hard to understand, and that as a result, some people wrest it to the detriment of their souls as they do the other scriptures? Paul himself at different occasions has had the need to defend his apostleship. In most of his epistles, there are chapters wholly dedicated to defending his apostleship. Paul's matters are not of today!

Do you even sit for a minute to understand what you wrote? According to you can or pfn cannot judge what is right or wrong but here Peter is judging those who twist scriptures as doing it for their own damantion. If rejection of Pauline epistles was just a matter of personal opinion why would Peter denounce such persons?
Again why would Paul defend his apostleship if it's was just a personal opinion? He even said anyone who preached a different gospel from the ones heard the other apostles preached are cursed and you say it is just a matter of personal opinion?

In what way did they act as authority over Abel Damina's faith? They asked him to stop misleading people on clear matters of faith! Simple! Matters that are generally believed and accepted by all believers.

And the whole church do not generally accept Paul's epistles as inspired scriptures? What credible non heretic church reject the teachings of Paul?

It is currently a debate. The new testament church is discussing the issue right now all over the world with different opinions coming to the surface.

what new testament church is debating it today name just one? Why is it hard for you?

Is tithing not scripture? Has anyone ever learnt about tithing in a university? Is it not from the Bible that we all get to know about tithing?



Show me how they have acted as authority over Damina's faith. If Damina is not teaching others what is considered entirely anti-scripture by all Christians worldwide, would anyone have to call him out? He should keep his heresies to himself and not corrupt the body with his leaven of falsehood.

just one question show me one non heretic church that rejects Paul's teachings? Just one

Steep:
Do you even sit for a minute to understand what you wrote? According to you can or pfn cannot judge what is right or wrong but here Peter is judging those who twist scriptures as doing it for their own damantion. If rejection of Pauline epistles was just a matter of personal opinion why would Peter denounce such persons?

My God! I thought I was talking to a mature Christian. I didn't know I have to break things down for you to understand. Would you actually place Peter alongside any of the PFN or Christian leaders we have today? Can't you see that if Peter were in the world today, whatever he says about Christianity will be final? When I said no one is an umpire over anyone's faith, was I not talking about today? If Peter, Paul, James, John or any of the apostles were in the world today, whatever they say would be final! Would you argue against Peter the same way you would argue against Adeboye or Billy Graham? They are the foundation upon which the church is actually built. We can trust their leadership! Today, nobody trusts anybody's leadership completely. Anyone can err. Hence, no one can be an umpire over the faith of others. Simple logic now. You can only correct what is generally accepted as wrong. Not sectional matters of faith that divide the Church.

There in your family, if you don't know that your father once lived in London, but there are unconfirmed reports of it, and meanwhile your father is unavailable to give clarity on the matter, would you call any member of your family who makes claims of your father's London residency a liar? That would be foolish. None of you are sure, though you'll all have your opinions depending on the level of information you have individually. Each of you will claim to be correct while the others are wrong. Yet, It will be wrong for anyone of you to call anyone a liar for ing or not ing the matter of your father's London residency. However, if someone comes up and says hey, your father never built a house when you all generally know that your father built a house, then you'll call that person a liar because that knowledge is explicit and generally known without any controversy. If someone comes up and says anything contrary to that, you can call him a liar or an heretic as in the case of Damina. But on the matter of the London house, you cannot call anyone a liar or an heretic. Everyone would hold on to his individual opinion as in the case of Suleiman and Selman. Except you want to deliberately bring up a fight of course. However if an external person who was an early associate of your father comes out to clarify the London issue, you would have to succumb to whatever he says as in the case of Peter. Should I be explaining this way before you get my point?

Again why would Paul defend his apostleship if it's was just a personal opinion? He even said anyone who preached a different gospel from the ones heard the other apostles preached are cursed and you say it is just a matter of personal opinion?

You should go and ask Paul why he had to defend his apodtolshipship. Personal opinion is personal interpretation! Paul says the same things as other apostles but some people thinks he contradicts! Why should you be twisting words? Some people think Paul contradicted Christ and other apostles. This has been since the days of Paul himself. How many times would I have to explain this to you?

And the whole church do not generally accept Paul's epistles as inspired scriptures? What credible non heretic church reject the teachings of Paul?


what new testament church is debating it today name just one? Why is it hard for you?


just one question show me one non heretic church that rejects Paul's teachings? Just one

Are Suleiman and Selman not part of the new testament church? Are they the only ones? Are there not other churches and individuals who have the same views as Suleiman? Are you a new Christian who knows nothing about the Christendom? Go and educate yourself and learn why some fellow Christians choose to call you a Pauline Christian!

conscienceman4:


Dr. Abel Damina, you have crossed the line, and you are therefore no more a representative of Christianity (The Body of Christ) in Nigeria.

This is an excommunication letter. wow!

GothamCities:

My God! I thought I was talking to a mature Christian. I didn't know I have to break things down for you to understand. Would you actually place Peter alongside any of the PFN or Christian leaders we have today? Can't you see that if Peter were in the world today, whatever he says about Christianity will be final? When I said no one is an umpire over anyone's faith, was I not talking about today? If Peter, Paul, James, John or any of the apostles were in the world today, whatever they say would be final! Would you argue against Peter the same way you would argue against Adeboye or Billy Graham? They are the foundation upon which the church is actually built. We can trust their leadership! Today, nobody trusts anybody's leadership completely. Anyone can err. Hence, no one can be an umpire over the faith of others. Simple logic now. You can only correct what is generally accepted as wrong. Not sectional matters of faith that divide the Church.

There in your family, if you don't know that your father once lived in London, but there are unconfirmed reports of it, and meanwhile your father is unavailable to give clarity on the matter, would you call any member of your family who makes claims of your father's London residency a liar? That would be foolish. None of you are sure, though you'll all have your opinions depending on the level of information you have individually. Each of you will claim to be correct while the others are wrong. Yet, It will be wrong for anyone of you to call anyone a liar for ing or not ing the matter of your father's London residency. However, if someone comes up and says hey, your father never built a house when you all generally know that your father built a house, then you'll call that person a liar because that knowledge is explicit and generally known without any controversy. If someone comes up and says anything contrary to that, you can call him a liar or an heretic as in the case of Damina. But on the matter of the London house, you cannot call anyone a liar or an heretic. Everyone would hold on to his individual opinion as in the case of Suleiman and Selman. Except you want to deliberately bring up a fight of course. However if an external person who was an early associate of your father comes out to clarify the London issue, you would have to succumb to whatever he says as in the case of Peter. Should I be explaining this way before you get my point?


You should go and ask Paul why he had to defend his apodtolshipship. Personal opinion is personal interpretation! Paul says the same things as other apostles but some people thinks he contradicts! Why should you be twisting words? Some people think Paul contradicted Christ and other apostles. This has been since the days of Paul himself. How many times would I have to explain this to you?




Are Suleiman and Selman not part of the new testament church? Are they the only ones? Are there not other churches and individuals who have the same views as Suleiman? Are you a new Christian who knows nothing about the Christendom? Go and educate yourself and learn why some fellow Christians choose to call you a Pauline Christian!

You think you are matured?

See how you shot down your own argument.

According to the letter you posted, it defines an heresy.

Heresy is, "a belief or opinion contrary to orthodox Christian doctrine and any belief, teaching or practice that explicitly undermines the gospel." Heresies are "beliefs or teachings that deviate from established or orthodox doctrine, often considered contrary to the accepted teachings of a religion or faith."
The definition of heresy has nothing to do majority agreement but contradiction against the historical teaching of the church from inception.

The orthodoxy teaching about Paul and his teachings are that Paul is truly an apostle and one of the foundation of Christianity and his teachings are inerrant making contrary opinion heresy meaning joshua Selman and suleiman are heretics.

You might think you are educated and mature but it is only an irony, even your definition of heresy goes against what is defined in the letter. Good day.

Steep:
You think you are matured?

See how you shot down your own argument.

According to the letter you posted, it defines an heresy.

Heresy is, "a belief or opinion contrary to orthodox Christian doctrine and any belief, teaching or practice that explicitly undermines the gospel." Heresies are "beliefs or teachings that deviate from established or orthodox doctrine, often considered contrary to the accepted teachings of a religion or faith."
The definition of heresy has nothing to do majority agreement but contradiction against the historical teaching of the church from inception.

The orthodoxy teaching about Paul and his teachings are that Paul is truly an apostle and one of the foundation of Christianity and his teachings are inerrant making contrary opinion heresy meaning joshua Selman and suleiman are heretics.

You might think you are educated and mature but it is only an irony, even your definition of heresy goes against what is defined in the letter. Good day.

Meanwhile, the scriptures never make Paul the standard for judging heresy. Jesus is the standard. Any contrary opinion to Christ is heresy. Not Paul.

While Paul aligns his messages with Christ's, some others think he doesn't, and that's where the problem is.

GothamCities:


Meanwhile, the scriptures never make Paul the standard for judging heresy. Jesus is the standard. Any contrary opinion to Christ is heresy. Not Paul.

While Paul aligns his messages with Christ's, some others think he doesn't, and that's where the problem is.

after all the beating about the Bush. Paul didn't align his message to christ, his message was christ message.
Galatians 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Steep:
after all the beating about the Bush. Paul didn't align his message to christ, his message was christ message.
Galatians 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

What does that change? It seems you just love to stir up arguments.

Paul said:

"..In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel." Romans 2:16.

1 Corinthians 11:1:

"BE ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ."

GothamCities:

I think he deliberately chose the topic to make it look controversial.



Smiling, it seems he deliberately chooses controversial topics to confuse the public and create tension that results in more popularity. It would be deliberate but there are some of his topics that cannot be scriptural even in content. For example, there's no way you want to preach on a topic that Jesus is not Devine and end up being scriptural.

The topic in which he said Jesus is not a Christian is albeit correct. Christianity is Christ likeness, and Christ can never be like Himself. So, he's right that Jesus is not a Christian. However there are other topics that are clearly heretic because there's no way you can fill the content without sounding heretic.

I agree with you. I also feel he is deliberately using logic couple with sensational topics to make a come back in the ministry that was already fading off.

RealityGod:


I agree with you. I also feel he is deliberately using logic couple with sensational topics to make a come back in the ministry that was already fading off.

Hmmm.

You nailed it!

GothamCities:


What does that change? It seems you just love to stir up arguments.

Paul said:

"..In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel." Romans 2:16.

1 Corinthians 11:1:

"BE ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ."

you love to argue blindly and you are deeply ignorant yet forming knowledge.
Paul's gospel is the gospel of Jesus committed to him through revelation.
You see how you have even more exposed your ignorance?
You quoted quotes where Paul said follow me, what has this got to do with with the fact that Paul's teaching is that of Jesus? You are arguing against scripture, even that scripture already told you whom Paul follow but however he is talking about the quality of life he lead, 1 cor 10.

I read somewhere you said people call me Pauline christian, yea I follow Paul because he followed Jesus not those fake apostles and prophets that are nothing but liars.
Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began.

Steep:
you love to argue blindly and you are deeply ignorant yet forming knowledge.
Paul's gospel is the gospel of Jesus committed to him through revelation.
You see how you have even more exposed your ignorance?
You quoted quotes where Paul said follow me, what has this got to do with with the fact that Paul's teaching is that of Jesus? You are arguing against scripture, even that scripture already told you whom Paul follow but however he is talking about the quality of life he lead, 1 cor 10.

I read somewhere you said people call me Pauline christian, yea I follow Paul because he followed Jesus not those fake apostles and prophets that are nothing but liars.
Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began.

Everyone who is called has a gospel committed to him through revelation. Not Paul alone.

Paul has to align himself with Christ like every other Believer. He himself said he had to keep under his body. He had to be ensure he wasn't misleading the flock. In fact, he had to first check out with the prominent apostles after he returned from Arabia to ensure he was on the right track.

Paul himself would also stand before the judgment seat of Christ like everyone's of us!

Steep, I didn't say people call you Pauline Christian. I said you should ask why some Christians call you Pauline Christian since you were asking me to show you who doesn't believe in Paul's ministry. I am a follower of Christ and of Paul who pointed me away from himself towards Jesus. I'm telling you to see things objectively and know why those people were firing at Damina.

GothamCities:


Everyone who is called has a gospel committed to him through revelation. Not Paul alone.

Any gospel different from what Paul and the other apostles teach is heresy.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

has to align himself with Christ like every other Believer. He himself said he had to keep under his body. He had to be ensure he wasn't misleading the flock. In fact, he had to first check out with the prominent apostles after he returned from Arabia to ensure he was on the right track.

Paul himself would also stand before the judgment seat of Christ like everyone's of us!

of course Paul followed Christ and he is a role model to every believer.
@ bolded this is false, Paul did not seek permission from anybody.

Galatians 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

Steep, I didn't say people call you Pauline Christian. I said you should ask why some Christians call you Pauline Christian since you were asking me to show you who doesn't believe in Paul's ministry. I am a follower of Christ and of Paul who pointed me away from himself towards Jesus. I'm telling you to see things objectively and know why those people were firing at Damina.

I proud to be a Pauline Christian, Paul preached nothing but Christ and him crucified. Christianity is basically Pauline. Ecclesiastical order that cannot remove the beam from their eyes. Placing tithing as one of the orthodox Christian doctrine exposed their in competence. I believe in tithing, but it is not part of the fundamental Christian teachings. There are churches that do not tithe it doesn't make them heretical, but rejection of the inerrancy of scripture of which the letters of Paul and Peter is concerned is plainly an heresy.

Steep:
Any gospel different from what Paul and the other apostles teach is heresy.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

of course Paul followed Christ and he is a role model to every believer.
@ bolded this is false, Paul did not seek permission from anybody.

Galatians 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

So, you and who are arguing about that?

I proud to be a Pauline Christian, Paul preached nothing but Christ and him crucified. Christianity is basically Pauline. Ecclesiastical order that cannot remove the beam from their eyes. Placing tithing as one of the orthodox Christian doctrine exposed their in competence. I believe in tithing, but it is not part of the fundamental Christian teachings. There are churches that do not tithe it doesn't make them heretical, but rejection of the inerrancy of scripture of which the letters of Paul and Peter is concerned is plainly an heresy.

So, when did I tell.you I'm not proud to be a Pauline?

All these children on Nairaland sef.