Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 683865 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.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#420889 Feb 8, 2013
Catholic Girl wrote:
I find it interesting that some out there can not face the truth. They would rather place mean icons on responses instead of gathering info. and figuring out for themselves.
Bunch of spoiled brats out there. Whaaa...
Hope everyone has lots of fun today.
I just laugh because I know that I speak the truth and it hits a sore nerve.

so to let you know, I may disagree with you and/or your doctrine, but I dont hide behind those icons. in fact as i said, for some reason my browser will not allow me to use them. and my spelling words is atrocious, for some reason, when I try and correct it, my letters begin to disappear, and I have to delete every thing in the sentence
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420890 Feb 8, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
208
<quoted text>
From the NABre pope approved Catholic Bible...regards Mt 16:18
Church: this word (Greek ekkl&#275;sia) occurs in the gospels only here and in Mt 18:17 (twice). There are several possibilities for an Aramaic original. JesusÂ’ church means the community that he will gather and that, like a building, will have Peter as its solid foundation.That function of Peter consists in his being witness to Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God.
You don't believe the teaching in your own Bible???!!!!!
Peter is not the solid foundation. Peter's *confession* of Jesus being the Messiah the Son of God was the rock being referred to in Matt. 16:18.
Eph. 2:20 later tells us that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ being the chief cornerstone.

The church is referred to in many occasions. For instance: Acts. 11:26, Rom. 16:16, 1. Cor. 1:2, Eph. 5:23..........
Pad

Fishers, IN

#420891 Feb 8, 2013
Dust Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
You say, "Knew is sexual relations." Thank you! The men of Sodom did not seek marital relations. The End.
As for your conclusions that she was not ready yet and had other children that is not proven in the bible period. Until is not an argument based on what it means when used in the bible. I presented enough texts to prove that. Where does the bible say Mary knew Joseph before or after or any man?
It is quite obvious that Mary and Joseph being a M a r r i e d couple would have had children together.If you assume otherwise,than you of course are only promoting the Catholic worship of Mary as a holy Icon who was untouched by Joseph the Man her Husband. I see a simple dysfunction in your mindset,that is not your fault but the fault of centuries of distortion and abuse of the role of Mary in regards to her Son,and her relationship with God in general.

You want to believe Mary was the first cloistered NUN,that is fine with me.I really don't care Dust Storm,it does not change my worship of the Living God,in His Son and throught the Power of the Holy Spirit.Mary is blessed,and she IS a human being like every other woman,She was not some rare species to be used for the only purpose of bearing a Holy Child. But a W o m a n,and married to a M a n,named Joseph.The ordinary given the extraordinary J e s u s.Jesus is the only extraordinary here not Joseph and Mary.The Bible focuses on Jesus,because He is Emmanuel,He is the glory of God who became flesh and dwelt amongst us.Not Joseph, or M a r y.What diminishes Mary is placing her on a pedestal she never belonged on to begin with,nor did she ask to be on.

We are not called to worship anyone but the Godhead.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420892 Feb 8, 2013
Is the Papacy a Divine Institution?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420893 Feb 8, 2013
The origin and history of Catholocism

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420894 Feb 8, 2013
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420895 Feb 8, 2013
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420896 Feb 8, 2013
Mary, Catholicism and the Bible

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420897 Feb 8, 2013
The Bible and Catholic Traditionalism

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420898 Feb 8, 2013
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420899 Feb 8, 2013
Reasons to Reject the Apocrypha

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420900 Feb 8, 2013
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420901 Feb 8, 2013
The Catholic Dogma of Infallibility

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420902 Feb 8, 2013
Are there Modern Day Apostles?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.asp...

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#420903 Feb 8, 2013
878
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
gehen Sie weg.
Infantile....
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420904 Feb 8, 2013
The Meaning of Baptism and the Catholic Ritual

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.asp...
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420905 Feb 8, 2013
Does Mary Intercede for Christians?

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.asp...

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#420906 Feb 8, 2013
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
Oxbow
Non sequtir
Your two statements are not connected. You are saying something like "I know your religion(Implied, you do not know yourself) So the grass is green and this doesn't apply to you....
You haven't connected my religion to your statement," Then this doesn't apply to you...."
You need to clarify with the rest of a syllogism of some kind. You are leaving two majors without a minor, in terms of logic....
886

In can be said only one way:

762 734 886

Your mindless prattle changes nothing in these words:

On this matter...it is not what I think your religion teaches...it is what I know it teaches...and on this matter I fully agree with them..

Then this does not apply to you: Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Pad

Fishers, IN

#420907 Feb 8, 2013
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>where did you find this gem of info that Joseph had been married for over 50 years when he married Mary?
common sense tells me this, either you are lying or your info is a lie.
this would have made jospeh over 70 years old, and no doubt to feeble to walk all of the distance down to egypt.
dont people like you have any common sense or did the nums beat that out of you idiots.BTW, I HATE STUPIDITY
Although I tolerate with compassion those who are stupid,I agree with you 150% here preston.It is incredible what people will believe to put Mary on that pedestal she was never suppose to be on from the very time of her precious life here.

Catholics and Orthodox pride themselves in saying they believed these things about Mary long before the Reformation and so on.The problem iwth that? They do not tell us that there were priests,and scholars of those times who refuted the MARIAN doctrines as they surfaced.JUST because the general concensus was to promote latria worship of Mary,does not negate the very challenge that was made to reject such worship to begin with.

The Apostles and LUKE in the New Testament N E V E R give us any reason to worship or venerate Mary in the way Catholics and Orthodox do.They claim that they received what the Apostles taught,but there is no word from the Apostles to support Marian doctrines,nor do the early church fathers ever say a certain Apostle told them to believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary,or that she was ever-virgin.I have some books on early church fathers and their sayings,and they never say"The Apostle Peter told me or whoever that Mary was ever-virgin"or that the Apostle Paul said those things about Mary.NO other Apostle is said to have claimed Mary's Immaculate birth,nor her ever-virginity.LUKE never even alluded to such a fact either,and he had more than ample time in personally interviewing Mary himself to arrive at the conclusions of the Orthodox and Catholic tradition concerning Marian doctrines.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#420908 Feb 8, 2013
Exclusivism and Christ's Church

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.asp...

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
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 min Trump Eats Babies 16,837
So how exactly did O.J. Simpson pull off a doub... 25 min common sense 25
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 1 hr Tony 6,417
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr Elerby 983,157
Venting Against FAKE Americans 1 hr His Eminency dr S... 6
O.J. Simpson is about to be a free man once again. 1 hr Rider on the Storm 26
Chinese are dishonest, greedy and cold-blooded. (Jan '14) 2 hr His Eminency dr S... 45
More from around the web