Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 548,926
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#425061 Feb 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It's idiotic.
It sets Christ in position of being compelled to obey something, and the whole construct of it not actually being "wine" when it says it's "wine" is fallacious. It's spin to permit protestant tradition and unscriptural.
You reckon they just called the unfermented grapes GRAPE JUICE..........lmbo

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#425062 Feb 28, 2013
044
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not just His 'flesh' we are to partake in.
To eliminate this "absurd" thinking, simply tell us which part of John 6 we should tear out of our bibles.
Thanks
The key to understanding the literal sense of Scripture is to distinguish between the terms literal and literalistic.

Every text of Scripture has a literal sense. That is, every text of Scripture has a meaning the author intends to convey. It does not therefore follow that every text of Scripture is to be read literalistically, like a newspaper.

If I tell you, "My heart is broken" I have a definite meaning I'm trying to convey: I am deeply grieved. But I am not using literalistic language to convey that meaning. I don't mean "My cardiac tissue is torn."

Same with the biblical authors. They employ all sorts of linguistic tricks of the trade--poetry, history, parable, hymn, fiction, reportage, myth, argumentation, legal codes, apocalyptic--to get their various points across. But however they express themselves, they all have a meaning they intend us to get. That meaning is what is meant by the literal sense of Scripture.

Thing is....some people, as yourself, are not able to make those distinctions...

Saban fan

Duluth, GA

#425063 Feb 28, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course I did. Why haven't you accepted the proof?
<quoted text>
Back-peddling much.
Maybe you can't explain it, because you never had the knowledge to do so at all. You may speak a good game to the other indoctrinated followers, but not with me, as I've called you out for the nonsense you think you know.
We'll just end this with - you are a fraud.
Please stop making up claims that you cannot support, except with distortions of the facts and blatant lies.
You've been busted.
<quoted text>
Supersize?
- you are way out of touch.
- Remember that adage - "smaller than a mustard seed"? Jesus gives an explanation that in itself is already "Supersized".
- One does not need to expand upon something that is already present within us.
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gth_pat_rob.htm
(20)
(1) The disciples said to Jesus: "Tell us whom the kingdom of heaven is like!"
(2) He said to them: "It is like a mustard seed.
(3) <It> is the smallest of all seeds.
(4) But when it falls on cultivated soil, it produces a large branch
(and) becomes shelter for the birds of the sky."
The simplicity of Jesus is what has been missed by your team, causing the errors in your judgment of Jesus.
You, over and over, place words in my mouth I've never said and have the lack of class to call me a fraud.

If "busted" is the term you give someone that's not willing to get in the mud hole with you, than i guess I'll be "busted" - You are King of your mind and mud hole, New Age Spiritual Leader!

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#425064 Feb 28, 2013
047
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
He (Christ) didn't say it was a memorial, though.
He repeated the teaching several times and didn't clarify as to it being symbolic even when followers grumbled and departed.
This is where we Catholics get very confused. "Bible alone" protestants have built an entire theology out of one line in Timothy, yet they work very hard to deny Christ's very clear teaching in John about the Eucharist. It's perhaps Christ's most emphatic teaching, yet we are to believe that He was being allegorical or whatever, even when He recognized that His followers were having a hard time following His message and some were leaving?
That's a tough, tough sell, Saban.
He also said: Mt 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Know anybody whom have lobbed off their right hand because it offended them????!!!!

Hello!!!!!
Dan

Omaha, NE

#425065 Feb 28, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
044
<quoted text>
The key to understanding the literal sense of Scripture is to distinguish between the terms literal and literalistic.
Every text of Scripture has a literal sense. That is, every text of Scripture has a meaning the author intends to convey. It does not therefore follow that every text of Scripture is to be read literalistically, like a newspaper.
If I tell you, "My heart is broken" I have a definite meaning I'm trying to convey: I am deeply grieved. But I am not using literalistic language to convey that meaning. I don't mean "My cardiac tissue is torn."
Same with the biblical authors. They employ all sorts of linguistic tricks of the trade--poetry, history, parable, hymn, fiction, reportage, myth, argumentation, legal codes, apocalyptic--to get their various points across. But however they express themselves, they all have a meaning they intend us to get. That meaning is what is meant by the literal sense of Scripture.
Thing is....some people, as yourself, are not able to make those distinctions...
But, you ARE able to make these distinctions-even though your post is an uncredited paste of someone else's writing?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#425066 Feb 28, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
047
<quoted text>
He also said: Mt 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Know anybody whom have lobbed off their right hand because it offended them????!!!!
Hello!!!!!
You didn't answer my question.

On what basis do you declare John 6 to be metaphorical?
Pad

Rockford, IL

#425067 Feb 28, 2013
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Clay -- outstanding post on many levels.
"I consider..." I believe..." Nice approach.
More...
"Powerful artwork..." and your your reference to Exodus are --- powerful and persuasive.
Is someone coaching you? This is really good stuff.
No matter, an enjoyable read. Thank you.
She did do a good job of stating her beliefs,and human r e a s o n i n g.

You see Free Mind when it comes to statues or images and trying to condone them for whatever reason under the sun,it just does not jive with the FIRST and SECOND commandment of God.It is a matter of obedience,not rationale.

The Catholics want to rationalize their use of statues,and they also rationalize their supposed lack of worship of the ((Mother of God)),whom they claim they do not worship,but in fact do.

Obedience is simple,DON'T do it!God did not say well in this case or that,or maybe a hundred years from now,or after paganism is neutralized,or replaced by sophisticated Catholicism."Don't do it!" "Do not make unto thee any image of a god,or something created to call it god." "Do not bow down to them or honor those images".

It was a matter of OBEDIENCE,never rationale or beauty,or artwork to please God."Thus saith the LORD." not "Lets analyze what He said."

We human beings have been given much freedom to do what we want,make what we want,build and create,GOD to the Jews first told them that He wants obedience rather than sacrifice,and we Christians are no different.When we decide that we want to gaze at a false image of God,or Jesus,Mary and the Saints to conjure up faith in ourselves,we are misinformed as to what God the Father said from day one as it were:"Thou shalt Not""Do not make" The Jews learned the hard way concerning disobedience,and we Christians are not far behind!
Fun Facts

Saginaw, MI

#425068 Feb 28, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
It's symbolism Clay. He's the door too, but He's made of wood, we don't knock on Him and he doesn't have hinges. It's symbolism. Participating in the Lord's Supper on "the first day of the week" is a memorial, not the real body, not the real blood. The church is the body.
You may have not been aware of...
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/scrip...
Questions?
http://avemariaradio.net/catholic-online-radi...
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#425069 Feb 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't answer my question.
On what basis do you declare John 6 to be metaphorical?
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#425070 Feb 28, 2013
7th Day Catholic Rocks wrote:
<quoted text>
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
This renders the prior moot?

Makes it disappear?

Don't think so. This isn't Christ saying "forget all that stuff from a minute ago-I was speaking metaphorically".
4GVN

Jackson, MO

#425071 Feb 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
He (Christ) didn't say it was a memorial, though.
He repeated the teaching several times and didn't clarify as to it being symbolic even when followers grumbled and departed.
This is where we Catholics get very confused. "Bible alone" protestants have built an entire theology out of one line in Timothy, yet they work very hard to deny Christ's very clear teaching in John about the Eucharist. It's perhaps Christ's most emphatic teaching, yet we are to believe that He was being allegorical or whatever, even when He recognized that His followers were having a hard time following His message and some were leaving?
That's a tough, tough sell, Saban.
What He DID say was,'This do in REMEMBRANCE of me.' You don't do something in remembrance of someone who is still present with you.
You claim that Jesus is still present; (body and spirit) in the mass. In His completeness you claim that Christ is there.
Perhaps you will understand better with this illustration. Perhaps I were to tell you...'Clay, we are going to have a little get-together Friday in remebrance of you. Oh, by the way, you are invited to attend.

Since: Nov 08

usa

#425072 Feb 28, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe 39 out of 266 Popes were married.
so who changed the rules? did god say to the church elders no more married men? or was it the made up council starting with constantine that decided married men can no longer be popes? this why the church is not what it claims to be,once written it can not be changed,isn't gods word suppose to be final? the final book writen by john was it,period,no changes allowed gods law/will was written.no one has the devine authority to change it,the C.C. can make all the false claims they want the pope is not a devine person or vicar of christ like "they" think.no where in history is it written the catholic church is THE church,there is no such thing,at least not on this planet,like god/jesus the church would be perfect and the catholic church is quite the opposite,there own history proves that.
4GVN

Jackson, MO

#425073 Feb 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
This renders the prior moot?
Makes it disappear?
Don't think so. This isn't Christ saying "forget all that stuff from a minute ago-I was speaking metaphorically".
He is clearly stating that He has been speaking spiritually, NOT litterally. COMMON SENSE would tell us that Jesus did not mean He was LITERALLY a DOOR, a VINE, a LAMB, or a LOAF OF BREAD or a GLASS of WINE.
What He clearly said was that it is the SPIRIT that gives life. Therefore it would be quite contradictory to believe that we recieve SPIRITUAL THINGS THROUGH FLESHLY RITUALS.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#425074 Feb 28, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
You, over and over, place words in my mouth I've never said and have the lack of class to call me a fraud.
I've haven't placed anything in your mouth, but am drawing conclusions from your posts. Like these:

a. You don't know anything about the religion you practice
b. You continue to make up lies about other people, just because you can't support the claims you made up.
c. The limited knowledge of your religion that you do possess, is only that which other men have provided to you.

Yep - a fraud....Oh wait....I guess we could also use what is designated in your religion's words, "a false prophet".

When you have some intelligence to post viable links and support for your claims, then respond back to me, until then, your tactic of avoiding is everclear to me and others.

Face the honesty Saban, it will make you a better person.
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
If "busted" is the term you give someone that's not willing to get in the mud hole with you, than i guess I'll be "busted" - You are King of your mind and mud hole, New Age Spiritual Leader!
No. WHen I used "bBusted" - it means I've spoiled your lie with truth, just so others are not misled.

Please try and stay focussed if you care to discuss anything with me.

Thanks for responding.

Since: Nov 08

usa

#425075 Feb 28, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I agree with what you're saying Jethro. The Cathedral of Saint Paul just spent hundreds of thousand dollars on a new pipe organ. On one hand I'm uncomfortable with that.
However, I need to understand what the Church is and what takes place inside their buildings during Mass. Then it makes a little more sense.
The Church believes that during the Liturgy of the Eucharist at the Holy Mass, the bread and wine are transformed into the very presence of Jesus Christ. Heaven meets Earth on the alter and we experience the great gift of the Eucharist. This is our faith.
When I realize this, the expensive organ and beautiful music along with the enormous Dome (signifying the covenant) over looking the alter where Christ is made present......it seems a little more appropriate to welcome Our Lord this way.
But this mega church the evangelical Baptist are building in MN is for their own pleasure. All the amenities are geared towards the young and hip and for the comfort of the audience.
Its for entertainment disguised as worship towards Christ.
Its not too tough to convince a teenage Catholic kid to come over to their side. No more kneeling. No more standing (unless you feel like you wanna boogie). No more boring liturgy. No more dressing up. No more confession. And the best part, there are girls you age who's parents let them wear push-up bras to Sunday celebration. Lol.
all churches basically do the same thing,they dress to impress,draw people in,it's not about god or jesus, it's about money,do you really think god/jesus cares about a pipe organ? or fancy stained glass windows when there are thousands dying daily due to the lack of food an shelter? i doubt it,not if he is a god of love for his children,and you talk about girls who wear push-up bras to other churches,i have found that the most amorous women to bed down with are catholic,married or not.spent many a night with catholic women,one was married living with her husband and i was picking her up at her house with her husband there,she had nothing to do with him because he became a drug addict, and she was still young and wanted to have a sex life,i just happened to come along at the right time,we spent many fridays having room service and servicing each other.jewish girls are the same.they can't seem to get enough.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#425076 Feb 28, 2013
4GVN wrote:
<quoted text>What He DID say was,'This do in REMEMBRANCE of me.' You don't do something in remembrance of someone who is still present with you.
You claim that Jesus is still present; (body and spirit) in the mass. In His completeness you claim that Christ is there.
Perhaps you will understand better with this illustration. Perhaps I were to tell you...'Clay, we are going to have a little get-together Friday in remebrance of you. Oh, by the way, you are invited to attend.
Well, yeah we believe that Christ is present at Mass. We believe that He can be present with us. Do you not believe this-that He can be present?

Christ and His redemption DO remain with us through time. His sacrifice was eternal, right?

The fact that we do it in remembrance of Him does acknowledge that He's not standing there in front of us in His human form.
Pad

Rockford, IL

#425077 Feb 28, 2013
GBA wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd give you ten thumbs up if I could. By the way I am a convert to the one holy Catholic and apostolic church. Praise God I found my way home!
And I am a convert to the Lord Jesus Christ.Marcus Grodi of the Journey Home,always says about evangelical prots,(Jesus and Me),a philosophy of individual possession of christ as it were by non-Catholic Christians.

Such an arrogant statement from a former Presbyterian minister who relied on Calvinism to gauge his own Christian beliefs,rather than on the Lord Jesus Christ.I have watched EWTN now for over a year,and sometimes miss it for time reasons or because I am working.But it is always the same the believer finds Christ in Evangelical circles but later he or she finds completeness in the RCC.Oh of course the Authority as well.It has all been hashed over.

But the truth is GBA that if you are converted to a church or religious system that does not mean you have been converted to Christ,and that applies to all affiliations within Christianity.

Christ is God in the flesh,but NOW He is at the right hand of His Father in glory.He sent the Holy Spirit down to us here on earth,to convict of sin,and to teach literally the truths and revelations of the Son of God.Peter proclaimed that Jesus was the Son of the Living God,and Jesus told him that "Flesh and blood did not reveal that to you,but the Holy Spirit did."

The fact remains only the Holy Spirit can reveal the true and living Christ to a soul,which is not done by human effort or ingenuity,but by the Will of the Father.

Our conversion is complete in the Godhead(Father,Son and Holy Spirit),not a church denomination or system.To Come Home is to be transformed by the power of the living God in your life,not to be convinced by a sophisticated formula of beliefs,traditions and practices.

The trouble with church conversion is that it causes one to have a relationship with a system,a philosophy,NOT a Person.Regardless of what church one belongs to,that particular church should in fact be as a brother or sister to the believer,not the governing,totalitarian GUIDE,but as even like a help meeet,both the believer and the church on equal standing longing to please and live for the Master the Lord Jesus Christ.

We all are the church,and responsible for our actions before God.EVERY believer will be accountable before God,There is no C h u r c h that will represent you in heaven before G o d,because you already will be the church that stands next to Jesus for the greatest wedding ceremony ever recorded in the history of life.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#425078 Feb 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't answer my question.
On what basis do you declare John 6 to be metaphorical?
Do you have a basis to show that it isn't?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#425079 Feb 28, 2013
4GVN wrote:
<quoted text>He is clearly stating that He has been speaking spiritually, NOT litterally. COMMON SENSE would tell us that Jesus did not mean He was LITERALLY a DOOR, a VINE, a LAMB, or a LOAF OF BREAD or a GLASS of WINE.
What He clearly said was that it is the SPIRIT that gives life. Therefore it would be quite contradictory to believe that we recieve SPIRITUAL THINGS THROUGH FLESHLY RITUALS.
No-He repeated the teaching verbatim several times despite the grumbling and departure of some of the assemblage. It would indeed be "contradictory" for Christ to deliberately be obtuse as to put off His followers.

RE: receipt of spiritual gifts via ritual-

You ascribe spiritual things to Baptism, I assume. It's a "fleshly" ritual.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#425080 Feb 28, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a basis to show that it isn't?
Yeah.

His repetition of the teaching coupled with the subtext of the grumbling of some hearing it. He was emphatic.

That and the belief and tradition of the early Church where they believed in the Real Presence.

to my knowledge, the Reformation was the first time that the idea that it was "symbolic" came into any kind of widespread promulgation.

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
Appjoy invite code (Apr '14) 10 min Ole 111
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 16 min Rosa_Winkel 751,253
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 25 min Ratloder 118,675
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 230,117
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 96,139
Heather Geier 1 hr YOUR PATHEDIC 1
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 2 hr AussieBobby 261,718
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Brother James 602,277
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 2 hr shanu 1,073

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE