Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 654001 comments on the CBC News story from Jul 10, 2007, titled Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican. In it, CBC News reports that:

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBC News.

ReginaM

Lakehurst, NJ

#417102 Jan 21, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
053 972 946 857
<quoted text>
I don't use the NABRE....I refer to it to show Catholics what they are not following that is being taught by their pope approved Bible...
I use the KJV....
I don't know of anyone who uses the NABRE. It's approved for private use if one so wishes, but not for the Mass.
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#417103 Jan 21, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
The recipients of Pauls letter were in communion with the Church. They were baptized into the faith and accepted the teachings of the Apostles.
"All those who call upon the name of Christ" is not a blanket statement for everyone. Although its an important start for the Christian...Christ also says "for many will say 'Lord Lord'. Right?
so when Paul says,

"16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written,“The righteous shall live by faith.”

**this is only for a certain group of people and not for us today?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#417104 Jan 21, 2013
071
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Oxbow
Different titles, so that we can understand the various attributes of Jesus through the mind of Peter, and others in the Bible are not definitions....For a clearer definition you might try
"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Matthew 1:23"
This son is called Jesus. And that means Jesus is God with us....
It is so simple.
Mt 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Does that mean that a man and woman whom God has joined together are the same person????!!!!! Is that person the man...or is that person the woman???!!!!
ReginaM

Lakehurst, NJ

#417105 Jan 21, 2013
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>the gates of hell shall not prevail,but islam will, they take their religion very seriously and for the church to say something against them,well you have heard about the churches being blown up in africa?it's only the begining. if the catholic church is gods church,how come he is doing nothing to stop it??
http://www.catholicmemes.com/captions/q-gospe...

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#417106 Jan 21, 2013
Clay wrote:(on worshipping Mary)
But she can't act unless we act first.
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know this?
Citation please.
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
This is my personal opinion. But I don't think its outside of Church teachings...
We have free will. God respects it so much, no Saint interferes with our ability to choose.
Citation? lol
As if you'd accept any citation I offered.
"but I don't think its outside of Church Teachings"
- Think?
- Not sure?
- that is why I asked for a citation.
- it isn't.

In truth - one can "interceded with just about any individual, and get the same results, possibly better.

Why don't you believe in the "Self" aspect of our lives?

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#417107 Jan 21, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Citation? lol
As if you'd accept any citation I offered.
I would, and in the least, it shows others that you have researched what you post.

If you don't, it just means that your opinion is nothing byut such, nad if you continue tio believe it, you are then a heretic.

Why don't you believe Jesus?
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#417108 Jan 21, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
The recipients of Pauls letter were in communion with the Church. They were baptized into the faith and accepted the teachings of the Apostles.
However they were Christians right...just normal people like you and me?

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#417109 Jan 21, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
071
<quoted text>
God said over and over that Christ is His Son....any erroneous interpretation of Scripture that alludes to the opposite, shows a fallible Bible...which is impossible...His Sacred Word is infallible...
Emmanouhl Emmanouel, em-man-oo-ale' of Hebrew origin (6005); God with us; Emmanuel, a name of Christ:--Emmanuel.
Note: Emmanuel, a name of Christ...
....and yet - Jesus never called himself "God", but you believe that.

You are confused on what the Bible means.

Well, considering it is incomplete, I can see your error. The same one made by many others before you.

Psalm 82:6-7
6 “I said,‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#417110 Jan 21, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahh...
Acts 9:13
13 But Ananias answered,“Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem.
**didn't believe like I do
Acts 9:32
32 Now as Peter went here and there among them all, he came down also to the saints who lived at Lydda.
**didn't believe like I do
**what is a osas christian compared to a christian?
???

The saints referred to in the epistles are those who believed and accepted what the apostles taught and were part of the Church, and those who didnt't were not called saints nor part of the Church.

I use the OSAS term because I know you believe in OSAS (contrary to most other protestants who call themselves Christian).

Do you think anyone who sits down and reads the KJV, regardless of the beliefs they then develop when they read it, and calls on the name of the Lord is saved for all eternity?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#417111 Jan 21, 2013
097
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Your interpretation is not however.
Do you believe Jesus is divine?
I did not interpret...I quoted Scripture from the KJV....

I believe per the Catholic encyclopedia teaching:

The fact of the incarnation

The Incarnation implies three facts:(1) The Divine Person of Jesus Christ; (2) The Human Nature of Jesus Christ; (3) The Hypostatic Union of the Human with the Divine Nature in the Divine Person of Jesus Christ.
Anthony MN

Saint Paul, MN

#417112 Jan 21, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
097
<quoted text>
I did not interpret...I quoted Scripture from the KJV....
I believe per the Catholic encyclopedia teaching:
The fact of the incarnation
The Incarnation implies three facts:(1) The Divine Person of Jesus Christ; (2) The Human Nature of Jesus Christ; (3) The Hypostatic Union of the Human with the Divine Nature in the Divine Person of Jesus Christ.
The Divine Person of Jesus Christ.

In your opinion how many divine persons are there?
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#417113 Jan 21, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
???
The saints referred to in the epistles are those who believed and accepted what the apostles taught and were part of the Church, and those who didnt't were not called saints nor part of the Church.
I use the OSAS term because I know you believe in OSAS (contrary to most other protestants who call themselves Christian).
Do you think anyone who sits down and reads the KJV, regardless of the beliefs they then develop when they read it, and calls on the name of the Lord is saved for all eternity?
The saints referred to in the epistles are those who believed and accepted what the apostles taught and were part of the Church, and those who didnt't were not called saints nor part of the Church.

**yes and they were normal folks just like you and me.

I know I should answer a question with a question but I'll make an exception.

David Koresh read and taught the Bible...think he was really saved...me either.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#417114 Jan 21, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
???
The saints referred to in the epistles are those who believed and accepted what the apostles taught and were part of the Church, and those who didnt't were not called saints nor part of the Church.
I use the OSAS term because I know you believe in OSAS (contrary to most other protestants who call themselves Christian).
Do you think anyone who sits down and reads the KJV, regardless of the beliefs they then develop when they read it, and calls on the name of the Lord is saved for all eternity?
1 John 5:11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

1 John 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#417115 Jan 21, 2013
102
ReginaM wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know of anyone who uses the NABRE. It's approved for private use if one so wishes, but not for the Mass.
The present discussion has nothing to do with mass...

If no one, or everyone, uses the NABRE...it does not change the teaching of this pope approved Bible..
marge

Leesburg, GA

#417116 Jan 21, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
so when Paul says,
"16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written,“The righteous shall live by faith.”
**this is only for a certain group of people and not for us today?
They don't believe what is written.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#417117 Jan 21, 2013
109
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
....and yet - Jesus never called himself "God", but you believe that.
You are confused on what the Bible means.
Well, considering it is incomplete, I can see your error. The same one made by many others before you.
Psalm 82:6-7
6 “I said,‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”
"..and yet - Jesus never called himself "God", but you believe that."

If I could understand what you are trying to say I would respond....

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#417118 Jan 21, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
071
<quoted text>
God said over and over that Christ is His Son....any erroneous interpretation of Scripture that alludes to the opposite, shows a fallible Bible...which is impossible...His Sacred Word is infallible...
Emmanouhl Emmanouel, em-man-oo-ale' of Hebrew origin (6005); God with us; Emmanuel, a name of Christ:--Emmanuel.
Note: Emmanuel, a name of Christ...
Oxbow

The Hebrew name Immanuel occurs twice in the Old Testament, both times in Isaiah, both in prophesies concerning the Messiah. In Isaiah 7:14, the prophet writes, "Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel." In 8:8 he writes, "...and the spread of [the Euphrates', see v 7] wings will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel."

Seven centuries later, Joseph finds Mary, his wife to be, with child and is understandably disgruntled. But an angel from God visits him in a dream and quotes Isaiah, saying that Joseph's little family is the target of a famous, seven hundred year old prophesy. The Child will be called Immanuel eventually, but for now he should be named Jesus (Matthew 1:19-25).

Where, in this context, exactly the name Jesus (=Joshua) came from is not immediately clear, but Immanuel is not the only name Isaiah pinned on the Messiah. In 9:6 he writes, "And his name will be called Palayaas (Wonderful Counselor), Elgebur (Mighty God), Abiad (Eternal Father), Sarshalom (Prince of Peace). Jesus, of course, became known by all those names.

The name Immanuel consists of two parts:

1a) The Hebrew preposition (im), meaning 'with'. It comes from the unused root ('mm) that also yields ('am), a people; (me'im), from or with; ('am), paternal kinsman; ('umma), against, beside (see the name Ammi).

1b) The nu-part in Immanu comes from the plural form in which the Im-part is put. The Hebrew language only very sparsely utilizes the verb 'to be,' and when it should be obvious that some form of that verb should be somewhere in the sentence, it's simply omitted. In English the plural goes to the pronoun ('with me' becomes 'with us'), and that makes the plural of the preposition 'with' impossible to translate literally. The word (im) means 'with me' and the word (immanu) means 'with us.'

2) The Hebrew word (El), the common abbreviation of the word Elohim, denoting the genus God.

Right after Isaiah names Immanuel for the second time (8:8), he says, "Devise a plan but it will be thwarted; state a proposal, but it will not stand, for God is with us" (v10). The Hebrew of the last two words of this sentence is ; an exact replica of the name Immanuel.

The name Immanuel means God (Is) With Us. However, we've already said that the verb 'to be' is usually omitted in Hebrew but actually something more nuanced is going on. Hebrew uses the verb 'to be' only when a behavior is specified that defines whatever is doing the behaving. In Hebrew a sentence like "the dog is outside" does not reflect a dog dozing in the shade, but a dog displaying behavior by which we recognize that it's a dog. Perhaps it's running after a squirrel and barking like there's no tomorrow; whatever, when the Hebrew says that the dog is, the dog is busy being a dog.

And that means that when God calls Himself I AM, He means that He's very busy doing His thing. The name Immanuel, however, lacks the verb to be, and denotes a passive presence of the Most High.

Immanuel means God Resides Among Us

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#417119 Jan 21, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Constantine had no authority on Catholic teachings!!
Man, you think after 300 yrs of being killed and tortured by the Roman Empire; when 30 + Popes were slaughtered, that they would suddenly hand Constantine the keys? Heck no.
There is no evidence Constantine influenced Catholicism in such a way. None. The whole idea is made up by fanatics a couple hundred yrs ago. They have zero evidence..
You are dense.

Constantine authorized the Bible, in that he took so-called "Catholic" teachings and assembled a group of men, to decide which books were to be canon.

He Authorized the men of the time to put together a bible.

Your play on words is why you are ignorant of the facts.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#417120 Jan 21, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Constantine had no authority on Catholic teachings!!
And we go as far as, no man has the authority to decide what "God" is telling anyone to believe, especially if they themselves never were spoken to.

You Catholics are so arrogant all the time. Why?
marge

Leesburg, GA

#417121 Jan 21, 2013
Ephesians 4:30
And do not bring sorrow to God's Holy Spirit by the way you live. Remember, he has identified you as his own, guaranteeing that you will be saved on the day of redemption.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 9 min River Tam 64,047
I prefer women's satin panties over men's under... 1 hr Clive 27
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) 1 hr Clive 80
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 106,508
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr Aura Mytha 973,802
I want to masturebate with my friend 2 hr Bbflip 1
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 3 hr ImFree2Choose 2,582
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 6 hr onemale 281,866
More from around the web