Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 20 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.

Saban fan

Mobile, AL

#422352 Feb 13, 2013
preston wrote:
<quoted text>lol, Jesus didnt need to be Baptsied, He did that so John would know that the Messiah had really come. hhe thought so but that Baptism showed him 4 sure.
that Baptism shows everyone(well except cults) that Baptism doesnt save, Jesus wasnt lost.lol
you come on here after studying false thelogy and think that you can teach people on here. I have forgot more Bible than you will ever know.
any person should have done some research before proclaiming that [gopher wood] was a cypress tree which is not native to that region of the world.lol
Show me where I have typed cypress.
Let's see your research on this little project....
Saban fan

Mobile, AL

#422353 Feb 13, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Face it. You lost. You've failed to convince me or anyone that sola scripture is what Christ and His Apostles taught. All you shown is that you're able to manipulate the verses.
Don't get mad at me because you're embarrassed by trying to be an intellectual expert on Christianity. You came across as smug, and now you look stupid.
Below are some interesting quotes from the following:
http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/S...

Martin Luther told secular and Church officials at the Diet of Worms: "Unless I am convinced by scripture and plain reason -- I cannot accept the authority of popes and councils because they have contradicted each other -- my conscience is captive to the Word of God."

Luther was right about popes and councils contradicting each other. They did -- often -- as history records. Not only did they contradict their teaching, accepting at times what had been condemned as heresy at others -- they had, on occasions, as may as three men claiming to be the Pope at the same time. Who rightfully had "apostolic succession?" Who determined it? The answer comes: the Roman Catholic Church. Does this should like circular reasoning? Carefully study the history of the Roman Catholic Church and its claim to "apostolic succession" and it is as appalling as it is ludicrous. Time and again it was based upon political expediency, avarice, power hunger and every manipulation to which man is capable of descending.

What the Roman Catholic Church really wants is to be the sole interpreter of Scripture.
Clay

Chicago, IL

#422354 Feb 13, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
None of the books not written where from Paul, and yet the all Early Church Father's who knew the Apostles consider them Scripture we know this from their writings.
What writings of Paul were Lost, curricular reasoning on your part as if you knew they would not be lost.
What writings of Paul did not make the cut? Your listseems well not existent.
Peter Clearly, with out doubt equates All Paul's letters as Scripture.
The question if you were on the ball and knew your stuff would have been HOW do I know 2 Peter is scripture do I have do everything for you? if so I will wind up debating myself. Come on you need to take it up a level if you want to play with the big boys
But you know what is really sad?(besides the fact you're very smug and reflect nothing of the Christ you claim to follow) is you set me up with this question above knowing I would respond with scripture which shows Paul had other writings.
That's ok though, I already know your response... There was no letter To the Laodiceans. It was something else Blah Blah.
Bible verse warfare may be something you guys enjoy. But frankly, it makes me sick watching you all pick apart our sacred scripture. You have no clue what the Holy Bible is. It doesn't belong to you. You're not an authority son, so don't boast to loudly, as your words will stand before God someday.
Saban fan

Mobile, AL

#422355 Feb 13, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
No you didn't. You adverted the question altogether.
Again - I haven't said "Paul" contradicted Jesus, I asked, "why do you think "Paul" was more enlightened than Jesus?", considering the Bible is littered with his letters, but very few of the teachings by Jesus.
That is the question I initially asked. You are the one who diverted with implying that "Paul" and Jesus haven't any contradictions.
Please stay focussed.
I'm sorry if I'm frustrating you.

OK, I don't think Paul was more enlightened than Jesus, but I can't say he was less so either if his writing was inspired.

(Is that still ducking your question?)
Saban fan

Mobile, AL

#422356 Feb 13, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Also - if I don't make sense to you, it is because you are probably so wrapped up in what men have given you to believe, you probably never researched Christianity before accepting what those men gave you to believe.
If you had done the research, you wouldn't be wondering what I am talking about.
You did research the religion before joining, right?
Or more aptly, you were probably indoctrinated with it through your childhood, and told to never question, huh?
You've been duped.
I didn't "join" a religion. I became a member of the church.

And, yes, I tried my hardest to disprove and discredit it before I eventually submitted to it. I became convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt after I failed miserably in proving it wrong.

I've not yet heard a question here that i didn't first ask and tried to prove correct.- with the exception of some of Preston's. Is he and that Australian Truth guy one in the same?
Clay

Chicago, IL

#422357 Feb 13, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
Below are some interesting quotes from the following:
http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/S...
Martin Luther told secular and Church officials at the Diet of Worms: "Unless I am convinced by scripture and plain reason -- I cannot accept the authority of popes and councils because they have contradicted each other -- my conscience is captive to the Word of God."
Luther was right about popes and councils contradicting each other. They did -- often -- as history records. Not only did they contradict their teaching, accepting at times what had been condemned as heresy at others -- they had, on occasions, as may as three men claiming to be the Pope at the same time. Who rightfully had "apostolic succession?" Who determined it? The answer comes: the Roman Catholic Church. Does this should like circular reasoning? Carefully study the history of the Roman Catholic Church and its claim to "apostolic succession" and it is as appalling as it is ludicrous. Time and again it was based upon political expediency, avarice, power hunger and every manipulation to which man is capable of descending.
What the Roman Catholic Church really wants is to be the sole interpreter of Scripture.
I'm shocked that you and everyone else would still hold true to sola scripture. Its evident on this thread that its a complete disaster. I mean, do you think we're that stupid? You guys are arguing tooth and nail about serious Christian matters. Hello? Some of you - obviously - are dead wrong.

So who is it? I'll sit back n let the fireworks begin.

Its you against that smug fella who's concerned about Egypt and Preston - who was visited by Jesus a few yrs ago, and his grandpa talked with the Apostle Paul in Heaven... Plus there are some SDAs and a Jehovah witness, and a gnostic.

Keep in mind, their all using sola scripture - supposedly guided to truth by the Holy Spirit.

Let me get a beer and watch.
socci

Plattsburg, MO

#422358 Feb 13, 2013
hojo wrote:
Catholics who know the TRUTH of the Bible and Apostolic Church History. Jesus first "drew a line in the sand" in Matt 16:13-21 when IN HIS OWN STATED WORDS, He established, formed and initiated His One True Apostolic Catholic Church, it ended at the Cross and began again with the Resurrection.

That's not what that passage says at all, and why you did not even quote it.

Christians are the church or bride of Christ. Your body is the temple that houses the Holy Spirit, if you will reject your pope and follow only Jesus.

This and other passages the RC has twisted in gnostic fashion to support the waffer god and 'virgin mary' beliefs, nuns or vestal virgins -- all preexisting Catholicism and Christianity to Roman practices adopted into a pagan mesh we know as Roman Catholicism.

Clay

Chicago, IL

#422359 Feb 13, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
What a straw man Clay show you where they say the exact words you dream up in the moment.
2 Timothy clearly says scripture is sufficient and doess so with synonymous words.
Just like the doctrine of the Trinity, So by your retarded logic above we must believe you don't believe in the Trinity as no where in the Bible does any Apostle say God is a Trinity 3 persons one God.
You are posting like a 3 year old, If you continue your retarded illogical posts I will post through and not to you anymore. I hope you smarter than this last post.
"if you continue posting your retarded illogical posts"

Wow, you and Preston are on the same team (I think) you boast of having the Holy Spirit, yet he calls everyone names and you call me retarded??

Btw, I have an autistic son. Someone called him retarded once. It hurt him and my family pretty bad.
socci

Plattsburg, MO

#422360 Feb 13, 2013

The Roman Church claims to found itself upon ONE verse in the Bible:

Mt 16:18 "And I say also to you, That you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Nowhere does it say there would be a Catholic Church.

Jesus is the rock the church / Christianity is founded upon.

Mk 12:10 "And have you not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:"

Jesus is also the stone in the OT book of Daniel, symbolized here the Second Coming..

Dn 2:34 You saw till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image... and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth... For as much as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands,

Stone = Jesus

At the time of the Apostles MANY churches were founded. Paul founded the churches at Rome.

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: 10 Making request, if by any means now at length I might have a prosperous journey by the will of God to come to you. 15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.

more Bible truth here..

www.youtube.com/playlist...

Saban fan

Mobile, AL

#422362 Feb 13, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm shocked that you and everyone else would still hold true to sola scripture. Its evident on this thread that its a complete disaster. I mean, do you think we're that stupid? You guys are arguing tooth and nail about serious Christian matters. Hello? Some of you - obviously - are dead wrong.
So who is it? I'll sit back n let the fireworks begin.
Its you against that smug fella who's concerned about Egypt and Preston - who was visited by Jesus a few yrs ago, and his grandpa talked with the Apostle Paul in Heaven... Plus there are some SDAs and a Jehovah witness, and a gnostic.
Keep in mind, their all using sola scripture - supposedly guided to truth by the Holy Spirit.
Let me get a beer and watch.
Martin Luther was pointing out inconsistencies between scripture and the RCC's popes and councils too.

"Martin Luther told secular and Church officials at the Diet of Worms: "Unless I am convinced by scripture and plain reason -- I cannot accept the authority of popes and councils because they have contradicted each other -- my conscience is captive to the Word of God.""

What are your thoughts about Martin Luther? Did he have a legitimate point?

Or, is the other statement correct that the RCC wishes to be the sole interpreter of scripture?

Would the current RCC acting as the sole interpreter of scripture be in violation of Paul's words to the Galatians concerning... if he or anyone else including an angel taught them differently...?
Saban fan

Mobile, AL

#422363 Feb 13, 2013
socci wrote:
The Roman Church claims to found itself upon ONE verse in the Bible:
Mt 16:18 "And I say also to you, That you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Nowhere does it say there would be a Catholic Church.
Jesus is the rock the church / Christianity is founded upon.
Mk 12:10 "And have you not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:"
Jesus is also the stone in the OT book of Daniel, symbolized here the Second Coming..
Dn 2:34 You saw till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image... and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth... For as much as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands,
Stone = Jesus
At the time of the Apostles MANY churches were founded. Paul founded the churches at Rome.
Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: 10 Making request, if by any means now at length I might have a prosperous journey by the will of God to come to you. 15 So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.
more Bible truth here..
www.youtube.com/playlist...
They miss the point of Matt. 16:18 all together:

13 When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,“Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

14 They replied,“Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

15 “But what about you?” he asked.“Who do you say I am?”

16 Simon Peter answered,“You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

17 Jesus replied,“Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

The subject is Peter's confession that Jesus IS the Messiah, the son of the living God. The confession is the Rock being discussed.
Clay

Chicago, IL

#422364 Feb 13, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
. Come on you need to take it up a level if you want to play with the big boys
I just saw your last line above. "you need to take it up a level if you want to play with the big boys"

Unbelievable. You actually think this is some sort of game. A contest. Bible verse warfare. A scripture slinging shoot out.
You make me sick. You have no clue about Christianity nor what it means to be a Christian.

The reality is: you and your Ideologues have drawn up a religion, based on some of the letters the Apostles wrote. You've zig zagged from verse to verse and found the religion you sought. You feel you're justified by this.
After all, it says right there in the books that Jesus said "this is a symbol of my body", right?
Oh wait, it was later that he undid the Eucharist by saying "the flesh profits nothing" yeah, that's the ticket. That's what we're looking for.' Our hands are washed now, we can just show God John 6:63, then he'll forgive us.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#422365 Feb 13, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
We, as Catholics do believe Jesus--but "more important" we believe (What HE Said)--in Matthew 16:13-21 regarding His One (AND ONLY) True (Universal-Catholic) Church and in John 6:47-59 regarding His TRUE BODY AND TRUE BLOOD --"in the Eucharist"---The bigger question for you New Age-- Why don't you believe the (spoken, stated and expressed words) of Jesus --in the Gospels?????????
Stop making up things and lying about your belief.

You only believe in a portion of his teachings.

Honesty is not strong with this one.
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#422366 Feb 13, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
As I'm sure you're aware (but probably convinced yourself otherwise) that Pauls letter to Timothy was telling him that scripture is profitable for teaching...
The scripture Paul was referring to would be the Hebrew Books the Apostles considered scripture. It would not have been his letter Timothy was reading. Nor would it have been future letters or Johns Revelation - which came at a later date.
Even so, Paul did NOT say scripture is the ONLY thing. You guys said this 1600 yrs later.
In fact Paul says the exact opposite in his letter to the Thessalonians "Hold steadfast to your traditions, taught to you by word of mouth AND letter" 2Thess 2:15
Any mention of scripture in the New Testament by the Apostles is always referring to the OT.
And when one uses teh O T scripture to prove a point then someone wants to start in Oh That is under the Old Covenant.
Well I got News for you there is Two Testaments of Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit Old and New.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#422367 Feb 13, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry if I'm frustrating you.
OK, I don't think Paul was more enlightened than Jesus, but I can't say he was less so either if his writing was inspired.
(Is that still ducking your question?)
Thank you for answering.

So you beleive Paul was "just as enlightened as Jesus". Of course this is a paraphrase of your post above.

Now back to your question to me....concerning contradictions.

As I posted before, "Paul" taught of the Spirit - as did Jesus. There may or may not be contradictions, as I have never physically compared "Paul's" teaching completely with Jesus'- due to the many letters and size of his letters, but that isn't my point.

The difference is that "Paul's" teachings have been spun in so many directions by men, that these men (even those who forged letters in the name of "Paul") lost the truth of the original teachings about Spirit along the way. Certain men changed the phrasing and then applied their own spin to it.

That is why I asked you to post Jesus' teachings on what you stated "Paul" taught. I believe you can't. But I'm not the one who thinks that there isn't. Remember - you think that there are no contradictions between "Paul" and Jesus. In most ways, you probably are correct, but in many ways, much of the Pauline theology was not taught by Jesus. Namely, "to know yourself is to know the kingdom of God".

Clearly Jesus is telling us to examine our inner beings of the actions we take and the speech we make, so we can ensure we are only promoting good things to others.

"To know yourself is to know the kingdom of God."
- encompasses many aspects of Self in just this one statement.

But as a so-called "Christian", you have been told not to beleive this teachings. Thus, you and many others, fail to believe in "all of what Jesus taught" and instead chose to accept what men have given you to believe.

The Self aspect of you has disappeared.

Does this help?

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#422368 Feb 13, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry if I'm frustrating you.
OK, I don't think Paul was more enlightened than Jesus, but I can't say he was less so either if his writing was inspired.
(Is that still ducking your question?)
BTW Saban you aren't frustrating me.

I've long passed that stage in my life.

Now the only frustration I may encounter is related to the many so-called "Christians" who claim to believe in all of what Jesus taught, when very blatantly, they have lied and are not honest with theirself, because they really only beleive in those "exclusive" texts that men chose to be the basis of Christianity.

It's all about how honest one can be with themselves and others.

In Christianity's case - it is one big lie perpetuated by men and their prowessness to gain followers. Lying to have followers?

Only in organized religion does this occur.

So why don't you believe in all of what Jesus taught?

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#422369 Feb 13, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't "join" a religion. I became a member of the church.
And, yes, I tried my hardest to disprove and discredit it before I eventually submitted to it. I became convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt after I failed miserably in proving it wrong.
I've not yet heard a question here that i didn't first ask and tried to prove correct.- with the exception of some of Preston's. Is he and that Australian Truth guy one in the same?
If you had done the research, you wouldn't be a "Christian".

I really don't think you asked the right questions.

Just out of curiosity, what did you try to disprove?

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#422370 Feb 13, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm shocked that you and everyone else would still hold true to sola scripture. Its evident on this thread that its a complete disaster. I mean, do you think we're that stupid? You guys are arguing tooth and nail about serious Christian matters. Hello?
Tell me Clay, which doctrines and/or dogmas are "serious Christian matters"?

How do they play out with saving someone? How do you know they do?

What evidence do you have to support your position besides men talking about it? We already know men wrote the Bible, did you have something that proves otherwise?

If you truly believe that there are "serious Christian matters" that are embedded in Christianity, we all already know only men came up with them, as there are no existing "God" writings to verify the "He" even exists.

And please don't go on the basis that "Faith" is your governing party, because I've already shown and proven that aspect to be a character of Self.

So whatcha got?

Enlighten me.....if you can.

Thanks!

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#422371 Feb 13, 2013
342 232
preston wrote:
<quoted text>I will take Jewish knowledge over that of Strongs. you are welcome to believe which ever you prefer.
as for me, the jewish people would know more about their religion and their land ,than you, me or strongs.
Judaism (from the Latin Iudaismus, derived from the Greek Ioudaïsmos, and ultimately from the Hebrew &#1497;&#1492;&#14 93;&#1491;&#1492;, Yehudah, "Judah"; in Hebrew: &#1497;&#1492;&#14 91;&#1493;&#1514;, Yahadut, the distinctive characteristics of the Judean ethnos) is the religion, philosophy and way of life of the Jewish people.

I will stick to my Christian beliefs and teachings...
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#422372 Feb 13, 2013
preston wrote:
<quoted text>it is easy to discern.
IF A PERSON HAS NO TESTIMONY AS TO WHEN GOD SAVED HIM, THEN GOD DIDNT.
IF A PERSON SAYS THAT THEY GOT SAVED WHEN THEY WERE BAPTISED WHEN THEY WERE THREE MONTHS OLD, WE KNOW THEY WERENT.
IF A PERSON SAYS THEY GOT SAVED WHEN THEY WERE BAPTISED AS AN ADULT, WE KNOW THEY ARE LYING(EVEN IF THEY DO BELEIVE IT), SINCE WATER BAPTISM ALONE DOESNT SAVE ANYONE.
AS IT IS WRITTEN, WITHOUT THE SHEDDING OF BLOOD THERE IS NO REMISSION OF SINS.SINS ARE ONLY WASHED AWAY BY HIS BLOOD NOT SOME RIVER WATER, NOR SOME CHLORINE FILLED WATER TUB.THAT CHLORINE WILL KILL LOTS OF DIFFERENT BACTERIA, BUT IT DOESNT KILL THE STENCH OF SIN.
If one was to review your many post they would see you spend more time trying to crush ones Faith in Christ that you do toward bring them to Christ.

Very Anti-Christ you are.

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
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr RADEKT 270,837
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr Good-Evil 830,421
Bull and Boar - an 18th century Welsh tavern. (Jul '14) 1 hr Ricky F 166
Getting even with a former bully 1 hr British women 3
Friends Mom Naked (With Pics) (Jan '13) 1 hr Yes I would 4
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 1 hr truthandcommonsense 3,667
jawan bhanji ki chudai kaise karu (Apr '13) 1 hr rajivas 94
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 hr Epiphany2 611,946
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 7 hr Student 40,223
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 8 hr Paul Porter1 99,270
More from around the web