Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.
Comments
407,981 - 408,000 of 533,626 Comments Last updated 7 min ago
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423336
Feb 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, it's not in the "manual" you think He left you.
He quoted from the "manual" (v. 1) quite often. Knowing that he was updating the "manual" with the new covenant he was putting in place for man, it seems logical to logical people that He would inspire the writing of that new covenant to highlight for mankind the fulfilled prophesies and to chronicle His life, death, resurrection, church and any changes in implementation of worship etc. that His being our Savior would change from that Law of Moses he quoted so often.

I don't understand how the Catholics on this thread could attempt to tarnish the validity of the Bible in one statement, say that everything they do is scriptural in the next and then immediately say statements like it is unscriptural to be scriptural. Sounds eerily similar to Obama defending his policy and actions.
Free Mind

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423337
Feb 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my point.
Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.
Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.
If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
We know the claim. It is a claim of faith, but there is so much real-world historical reality that contradicts it.

If Jesus established the RCC to teach "perfect morals" for the purpose of saving souls, why would Jesus not provide better guidance for this wonderful teacher?

Only about 5% of humanity today practices the "one-true" faith fully. Germany has lost almost 1/3 in the past 10 years alone -- and that was with a German Pope.

Jesus suffered and died for that? Who screwed up?

Or maybe your claim is absurd and the RCC is no better or worse on balance than most other Christian churches?
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423338
Feb 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my point.
Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.
Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.
If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
I don't think you read the link.

I KNOW, once again, you provided NO scripture to justify your opinion.
Free Mind

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423339
Feb 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You knew what I meant, so why the whining?
Christ taught that we were to partake in His Body and Blood, and that baptism was necessary for salvation.
If you believe otherwise about these two, you believe in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.
According to who?

Where's the beef?

You claim "perfect teachings on faith and morals" yet you can't even tell us which teachings are "perfect" and which are not.

For good reason that you have never considered.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423340
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You knew what I meant, so why the whining?
Christ taught that we were to partake in His Body and Blood, and that baptism was necessary for salvation.
If you believe otherwise about these two, you believe in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.
The way you've stated it, I don't believe otherwise about those two teachings. Didn't you tell me that was where the Catholic Church was so different and superior to the church of Christ?

Now, we do practice those God's way. Basing our actions on the scriptural instructions we were given. Ex: we don't serve the Lord's Supper on Saturday, we don't sprinkle of pour and we don't baptize infants because they don't know what's going on and they cannot perform necessary requirements for being saved - repentance or confession, like that of Peter's which was the ROCK upon which the foundation of the church would be laid.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423341
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand my point.
Scripture tells us that Christ established the Church to teach.
Thus, scripture cannot be the sole means to instruction of the faith. The Church teaches and scripture teaches. Both are authoritative.
If you contend that "scripture only" is authoritative, you are, in fact, going against scripture.
Why did Paul warn us in Galatians about anyone teaching anything they had not already taught?

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423342
Feb 18, 2013
 
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes!----- you've got it "exactly" right which is "precisely" what Jesus Christs One True Catholic Church--teaches, proclaims and believes (each and every day) at Daily Mass.
The fact is Confrinting, its about the "only thing" that you have "ever said" that has ANY crediblity!...being born again of water and of the Spirit.......... In John 3:3 Jesus said, "unless a person is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven". The Catholic Church has adhere to and proclaim "these words of Jesus Christ for over 2000 years. You're not telling us "anything new" that has not been done since Our Lord formed, initiated and established His first Church in Antioch!!
~~~

You said
You're not telling us "anything new" that has not been done since Our Lord formed,

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

i AM NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST AS YOU CATHOLIC'S ARE..

I have no intentions to tell you any thing new...
I don't edit... change... delete from... or add to the... GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST

I DON'T ADD WORSHIP OF MARY...idolatry or attempt to alter the word of GOD to fit fables As you CONSTANTIN'S DO.

I HAVE NO DESIRE TO INSULT THE HEAVENLY FATHER IGNORING HIS WORD AND AND ATTEMPTING TO WRITE MY OWN AS YOU CATHOLICS HAVE DONE.

YOU WILL RECEIVE ETERNAL HELL TO PAY FOR YOU FOOLISHNESS.

Rom_3:4 .... yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED NUMEROUS TIMES...

But like a dumb brute beast you turn and rend those that attempt to give you the truth...and help you escape the wrath to come...

Jud 1:10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.
Free Mind

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423343
Feb 18, 2013
 
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
The statement you (or FM) put into play was dependent upon the Catechism, since it was framed as Catholic teaching.
The Catechism IS Church teaching.
Again, this hissy fit from you lets me know that you are indeed "busted", since you're diverting.
Thanks.
Dan could never find the statement that FM supposedly "put into play" because somehow magically FM had it removed maybe.

LOL, I have been given credit for this many times here.

The inner defenses are unconscious. They consist of a kind of magic aura which the mind builds around cherished belief.

Dan uses specious rationalization.

Dan is able to read and twist my words in his own mind. I deny the words and rationally ask for Dan to show us where these words are supposedly written.

Arguments which penetrate into the magic aura are not dealt with rationally but by a specific type of pseudo-reasoning.

FM supposedly wrote something, which FM cannot challenge or re-state, because no one can find where these supposed words exist.

Thus Dan is able to avoid in his mind the central point.

RCC teachings at the time of Thomas Jefferson's death would have placed Mr. Jefferson among the ranks of -- how should I put it -- the un-saved :o)

Absurdities and contradictions are made acceptable by specious rationalization and avoidance.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423344
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
He quoted from the "manual" (v. 1) quite often. Knowing that he was updating the "manual" with the new covenant he was putting in place for man, it seems logical to logical people that He would inspire the writing of that new covenant to highlight for mankind the fulfilled prophesies and to chronicle His life, death, resurrection, church and any changes in implementation of worship etc. that His being our Savior would change from that Law of Moses he quoted so often.
I don't understand how the Catholics on this thread could attempt to tarnish the validity of the Bible in one statement, say that everything they do is scriptural in the next and then immediately say statements like it is unscriptural to be scriptural. Sounds eerily similar to Obama defending his policy and actions.
Christ did not quote the Bible, I don't believe, as His life predicated NT scripture.

Also, although you persist in saying so to construct your argument, no Catholic denies the valildity of scripture.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423345
Feb 18, 2013
 
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
The way you've stated it, I don't believe otherwise about those two teachings. Didn't you tell me that was where the Catholic Church was so different and superior to the church of Christ?
Now, we do practice those God's way. Basing our actions on the scriptural instructions we were given. Ex: we don't serve the Lord's Supper on Saturday, we don't sprinkle of pour and we don't baptize infants because they don't know what's going on and they cannot perform necessary requirements for being saved - repentance or confession, like that of Peter's which was the ROCK upon which the foundation of the church would be laid.
I didn't say superior. You asked which church had belief and practice akin to the Church described in scripture.

You partake in the body and blood of Christ at your services?

You just told me that you don't believe in salvific baptism. The church of scripture believed that baptsim was salvific, not that people had to agree to it for it to be salvific.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423346
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan could never find the statement that FM supposedly "put into play" because somehow magically FM had it removed maybe.
LOL, I have been given credit for this many times here.
The inner defenses are unconscious. They consist of a kind of magic aura which the mind builds around cherished belief.
Dan uses specious rationalization.
Dan is able to read and twist my words in his own mind. I deny the words and rationally ask for Dan to show us where these words are supposedly written.
Arguments which penetrate into the magic aura are not dealt with rationally but by a specific type of pseudo-reasoning.
FM supposedly wrote something, which FM cannot challenge or re-state, because no one can find where these supposed words exist.
Thus Dan is able to avoid in his mind the central point.
RCC teachings at the time of Thomas Jefferson's death would have placed Mr. Jefferson among the ranks of -- how should I put it -- the un-saved :o)
Absurdities and contradictions are made acceptable by specious rationalization and avoidance.
That FM has to supply such a windy backpedal is indicative that FM cannot inform his prior claim.
Free Mind

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423347
Feb 18, 2013
 
At Vatican 2, the RCC apologized to Protestants -- why?

Did the RCC Catechism (the great escape that few Catholics are able to reference and quote) change between 1900 and 2000?

It is absurd to be so selective in the use of "Holy tradition."

It is absurd that something that was taught de fide 500 years ago can be magically forgotten, as if it was never taught as "perfect" or ever had centuries of real-life consequence.

Absurd, but it must be accepted.

The one-true claim is busted.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423348
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
Why did Paul warn us in Galatians about anyone teaching anything they had not already taught?
So people wouldn't put themselves in front of scriptures-for instance, saying they have authority to interpret God's word themselves, that the Church is unnecessary for salvation, etc.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423349
Feb 18, 2013
 
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
We know the claim. It is a claim of faith, but there is so much real-world historical reality that contradicts it.
If Jesus established the RCC to teach "perfect morals" for the purpose of saving souls, why would Jesus not provide better guidance for this wonderful teacher?
Only about 5% of humanity today practices the "one-true" faith fully. Germany has lost almost 1/3 in the past 10 years alone -- and that was with a German Pope.
Jesus suffered and died for that? Who screwed up?
Or maybe your claim is absurd and the RCC is no better or worse on balance than most other Christian churches?
When Christ was actually here on Earth, a far smaller percentage of people believed in Him at all.

Christ is not "culpable" for the actions of men, FM. Men are.

Sheesh.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423350
Feb 18, 2013
 
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you read the link.
I KNOW, once again, you provided NO scripture to justify your opinion.
I need to direct you to the Great Comission?

Matt. 16:19
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423351
Feb 18, 2013
 
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
According to who?
Where's the beef?
You claim "perfect teachings on faith and morals" yet you can't even tell us which teachings are "perfect" and which are not.
For good reason that you have never considered.
According to the Bible, which is Saban's frame of reference.

Yeah, I know which Church teachings are incontrovertibly true.

Why make such a silly statement?
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423352
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Christ did not quote the Bible, I don't believe, as His life predicated NT scripture.
Also, although you persist in saying so to construct your argument, no Catholic denies the valildity of scripture.
He quoted many times from the scripture in my Bible. Even while he was on the cross he quoted scripture!!!

Are you really that ignorant? If so, stop typing so much and study/learn.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423353
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan could never find the statement that FM supposedly "put into play" because somehow magically FM had it removed maybe.
LOL, I have been given credit for this many times here.
The inner defenses are unconscious. They consist of a kind of magic aura which the mind builds around cherished belief.
Dan uses specious rationalization.
Dan is able to read and twist my words in his own mind. I deny the words and rationally ask for Dan to show us where these words are supposedly written.
Arguments which penetrate into the magic aura are not dealt with rationally but by a specific type of pseudo-reasoning.
FM supposedly wrote something, which FM cannot challenge or re-state, because no one can find where these supposed words exist.
Thus Dan is able to avoid in his mind the central point.
RCC teachings at the time of Thomas Jefferson's death would have placed Mr. Jefferson among the ranks of -- how should I put it -- the un-saved :o)
Absurdities and contradictions are made acceptable by specious rationalization and avoidance.
You stated that the Church "knows" who is Heaven, thus they know who isn't.

I simply asked for proof that they DO in fact tell us who isn't, and I get days of backpedal and deflection, spiced up with a few hissy fits.

"Absuridites and contradictions", "specious rationalization and avoidance" just about covers your posts in response.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423354
Feb 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say superior. You asked which church had belief and practice akin to the Church described in scripture.
You partake in the body and blood of Christ at your services?
You just told me that you don't believe in salvific baptism. The church of scripture believed that baptsim was salvific, not that people had to agree to it for it to be salvific.


And once again you present opinion rather than scripture evidence. This could only be the correct way to debate Bible in the Catholic Church since It seems evident that the church's opinion today can supersede the Holy scriptures.
Dan

Omaha, NE

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#423355
Feb 18, 2013
 
Free Mind wrote:
At Vatican 2, the RCC apologized to Protestants -- why?
Did the RCC Catechism (the great escape that few Catholics are able to reference and quote) change between 1900 and 2000?
It is absurd to be so selective in the use of "Holy tradition."
It is absurd that something that was taught de fide 500 years ago can be magically forgotten, as if it was never taught as "perfect" or ever had centuries of real-life consequence.
Absurd, but it must be accepted.
The one-true claim is busted.
He apologized for sins of omission and commission done in the name of the Church. Nominally, the Crusades and acts during the Inquisitions.

The Catechism did not instruct these actions done, no.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

577 Users are viewing the Top Stories Forum right now

Search the Top Stories Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 3 min RFD 1,622
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 7 min Dr_Zorderz 256,991
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 11 min Catcher1 722,232
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 12 min Buck Crick 224,657
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 14 min RiccardoFire 93,852
Sudi Arabia Scientists Spreading deadly Ebola v... 14 min yon 10
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 17 min WasteWater 3,994
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 24 min RiccardoFire 172,557
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 30 min Krackerjacks 115,646
Does anyone do incest sex with your sister (Apr '12) 2 hr rahx 124
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••