Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 596662 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.

rod

Apollo, PA

#427176 Mar 12, 2013
Elizabeth wrote:
As someone who is catholic and was raised in the faith, I find this truly offensive that the Pope would make a statement like this. It is making me seriously consider leaving the church. As long as popele believe in God and the holy trinity, why does it matter whether they believe as catholics, methodists, lutherans, etc? I think Benedict has gone too far with this statement and I do believe it is going to hurt the catholic church in the long run.
SO TRUE

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#427177 Mar 12, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of error in responses!
Pelase post mine - in detail and have a ready response collaborating my error(s).

I'll wait, or will you just divert altogether like you have done repeatedly? We'll eventually see how honest you are. If not, "God" sure will, huh?
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
You can discuss honesty after that post, Screwtape? Do you think I'm Wormwood?
"Screwtape?" - posting to the wrong poster again?

As for my opinion of you, and if you are "wormwood", well, I know you aren't a plant, so that rules out that definition. As for being "bitter" or "extremely unpleasant", I don't know you well enough to make a conclusion on these traits, but I can say, you aren't very honest.

Whether or not, you being bitter upon what I've written has caused you to be dishonest, I really don't know. Sounds like something your "Self" will be able to help you resolve. All yo have to do is listen for that little voice inside you.

You know - your subconscious - so you can "know yourself" and "look within".
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
You've tried to discredit almost every scripture I've posted in retaliation to the incorrect claims you've made and you always have a reason for disbelieving the verbatim words straight from the Bible.
Yes I have, and will continue to do so. It's not my fault that you believe them to be true, even when I've shown you multiple times that the meanings you think exist - DON'T.
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
There are no words for describing God????? I find many, many descriptions of God throughout the Bible!
....all by men describing a unseen "God".

Are you really this gullible or ignorant to believe everything you read? Do a lot more research.

Oh yeah, anticipate the astonishment.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#427178 Mar 12, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
170
<quoted text>
Oh lame of brain!!!!
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
The Chinese are a part of the world....really!!!! Check it out!!!!
Soooo...are they saved or not?

Do they have to have the qualifier of, "believing in Jesus"?

I really doubt you even understand this phrase.
Sickd

Australia

#427179 Mar 12, 2013
What difference will anything make? Now that the Hitler Youth pope has hung up his fruit of the loom knickers, the paedophiles in the Vatican will just appoint another geriatric to replace him.

Yawn...
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427180 Mar 12, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
all the if's in the world will never be answered Michael.
Because 'GOD" IS GOD" He know all things and before time beGAN "GOD" HAD A PLAN FOR OUR SALVATION.
HE MADE AWAY; JESUS IS THAT WAY.
Hey LTM, whats going on in Sudbury? We had a string of warm days down here.
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427181 Mar 12, 2013
Sickd wrote:
What difference will anything make? Now that the Hitler Youth pope has hung up his fruit of the loom knickers, the paedophiles in the Vatican will just appoint another geriatric to replace him.
Yawn...
Are you Anthony that use to post on here?
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427183 Mar 12, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
all the if's in the world will never be answered Michael.
Because 'GOD" IS GOD" He know all things and before time beGAN "GOD" HAD A PLAN FOR OUR SALVATION.
HE MADE AWAY; JESUS IS THAT WAY.
If God knows everything before it happens and God has a divine plan for each of us, what is the point in praying for something to happen or change, if God already has his plan in place that is different than what you want your prayers to change? You want God to change his plan?

Sickd

Australia

#427184 Mar 12, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you Anthony that use to post on here?
No. I have no idea who 'Anthony' is, nor do I care.

I suppose any day now, once all those filthy cardinals have blown smoke up their arses (and God knows up what else), we'll be inflicted with another seventy-something has-been who hasn't had a fcuk since Saint Peter last got sucked off.

More of the same from the mick church and their 'traditions'.
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427185 Mar 12, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
170
<quoted text>
Oh lame of brain!!!!
For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
The Chinese are a part of the world....really!!!! Check it out!!!!
Wouldn't it be a lot easier if God just appeared to EVERYONE once in awhile? No need for the red tape of the adam and eve story tainting every unborn human with a sin they never committed themselves. No need to for Jesus to come and save the day, no need for christianity that only represents about 20% of our world population.

I am sure if God would appear it would certainly help his credability along to all those non believers.

God could do that because he is God..........no God in sight yet!

MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427186 Mar 12, 2013
Sickd wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I have no idea who 'Anthony' is, nor do I care.
I suppose any day now, once all those filthy cardinals have blown smoke up their arses (and God knows up what else), we'll be inflicted with another seventy-something has-been who hasn't had a fcuk since Saint Peter last got sucked off.
More of the same from the mick church and their 'traditions'.
Why don't you tell us how you really feel?
guest

United States

#427187 Mar 12, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
New Age writes:
You wrote - "When you blatantly ignore Jesus' words that WERE RECORDED,"
Sounding sort of hypocritical, aren't you?
If you take what is recorded only in the Bible, then YOU are blatantly ignoring non-canonical written texts (recorded).
Do you use only the NT to come to this decision of yours?
-
FYI - It absolutely is NOT hypocritical for a Christian to quote The Bible while ignoring NON-canonical religious texts. But somehow you are trying to make it so.
Again - why would a Christian quote a book such as the Qur'an or Book of Mormon when those books have NOTHING to do with Christianity? Sounds like you didn't actually read what I wrote - at the very least, your logic is, well, non-existent.
-
-
guest wrote:
You can follow all the non-canonical written texts you want. Have at it, there are plenty to choose from:
-
The Qur'an
The Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants
The Kitab-i-Iqan
The Zend-Avesta
The Rigveda
.. there are many more and probably all inclusive with the "New Age" people.
but me? hypocritical? I don't think so. I WON'T follow the pope, I follow Christ instead - and that is NOT hypocritical.
-
What Catholics don't understand is this: If you want to call yourself a Christian, you gotta do what Christ said to do. nothing more. You don't get to make it up as you go along. Which is what he Catholic church does, while accusing everyone else of doing that very thing.
The world of Christianity is so confused BECAUSE of the Catholic church, and trying to extract themselves from the RC church has led to the confusion. There are MANY traditions of men that people have a difficult time giving up ... but I think the further away one gets from the Catholic church ... the closer to Christianity you become - starting with, "Call no man father."
-
AGAIN!... right out of the starting gate -
they
disobey
Christ.
By going AGAINST the direct words of Christ, they show that they are not FOLLOWERS of Christ.
-
Stop signs say *STOP* for a reason. It is a DIRECT COMMAND. IF you read the sign and PROCEED anyway, you could lose your life and cause the death of others in an accident.
-
Likewise, Jesus said, "Call no man your father." FOR A REASON. It is a DIRECT COMMAND - if you ignore his words and do it anyway.... you could lose your life.
-
-
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
My post to you had nothing to do with the Pope, but you seemed to make it so. Strike one.
THis is the question I asked, that you didn't answer. This is a second chance for you...
"Do you use only the NT to come to this decision of yours?"
Thanks!
-
My post had nothing to do with Christians believing NON-canonical texts, but you seem to want to make it so. Therefore, I shall respond in kind and assign one arbitrary *strike* to you, too - as if keeping score using sports metaphor has anything to do with this.
-
NO. I do NOT use only NT (more accurately called Greek Scripture). If you have read my posts you would see that - so asking your question is of no real or practical significance. Furthermore, quoting non-canonical texts to support Christianity, would be ... un-Christian ... kind o' like what Catholics do when they quote the
Pope.
Sickd

Australia

#427188 Mar 12, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
Wouldn't it be a lot easier if God just appeared to EVERYONE once in awhile? No need for the red tape of the adam and eve story tainting every unborn human with a sin they never committed themselves. No need to for Jesus to come and save the day, no need for christianity that only represents about 20% of our world population.
I am sure if God would appear it would certainly help his credability along to all those non believers.
God could do that because he is God..........no God in sight yet!
God won't 'appear'. Why? Because there isn't any money to be made in an accessible god. They call it faith, in order to keep the money rolling in.
Sickd

Australia

#427189 Mar 12, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you tell us how you really feel?
I just did!
guest

United States

#427190 Mar 12, 2013
guest wrote:
AGAIN!... right out of the starting gate -
they
disobey
Christ.
By going AGAINST the direct words of Christ, they show that they are not FOLLOWERS of Christ.
-
-
-
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
...and yet you do also when you don't utilize the non-canonical texts.
If you need me to spell it out for you - I will.
You admonish others for not following Jesus, but you don't as well, when it comes to the non-canonical teachings by Jesus.
So yes, you are a hypocrite. This above statement says it all.
-
-
explain to me - like I'm a five year old - why NON-canonical text has anything to do with Christianity. By your loose logic I could quote the Stock Market ...
Free Mind

Wesley Chapel, FL

#427191 Mar 12, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
157 142
<quoted text>
Such wisdom!!!!!!
But and however, the Greek word ekklesia from which the word church was translated did exist and is hereby definated (new word): a calling out, i.e.(concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both):--assembly, church.
It don't say nuttin' bout no temple!!!!!
So you say Jesus said "... I will build my assembly?"

You are applying the modern definition to Jesus' day, but there was no such concept at that time. The Greeks did not use it in a religious sense. Nor did the Jews of the time.

In Jesus' day... ekklesia -- a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly of the people convened at the public place of the council for the purpose of deliberating, the assembly of the Israelites (which had nothing to do with the Temple).

We know what you WANT to believe. We know what the RCC WANTS us to believe. And then there are the facts.
Free Mind

Wesley Chapel, FL

#427192 Mar 12, 2013
More on Temple vs. ekklesia...

http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/e...

"... the metaphor of mater ecclesia appeared suddenly in late second-century patristic literature and without explanation. Yet, once the image was introduced, patristic writers continuously employed
mater ecclesia as an image characterizing the corporate identity of the church."

If Jesus said "ecclesia," why did it take almost 200 years for the term to appear in religious writings?

Nope, Jesus said TEMPLE, or nothing at all. The RCC made it up after the fact.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#427193 Mar 12, 2013
178 170
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Soooo...are they saved or not?
Do they have to have the qualifier of, "believing in Jesus"?
I really doubt you even understand this phrase.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Only God and each individual can answer that question with regards each individual's true spiritual status......most Christians know this...

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#427194 Mar 12, 2013
185
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
Wouldn't it be a lot easier if God just appeared to EVERYONE once in awhile? No need for the red tape of the adam and eve story tainting every unborn human with a sin they never committed themselves. No need to for Jesus to come and save the day, no need for christianity that only represents about 20% of our world population.
I am sure if God would appear it would certainly help his credability along to all those non believers.
God could do that because he is God..........no God in sight yet!
The Incarnate Son of God, with the same Divinity as God, said "When you see me...you see God", lived on this earth some thirty-three years. He was crucified!!!!
His gift of Salvation is based on belief....not proof. He was "up front" about it..
Quote: He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
From what you are saying, I would bring fans and lots of Kool-aid!!!!

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#427195 Mar 12, 2013
191 157 142
Free Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
So you say Jesus said "... I will build my assembly?"
You are applying the modern definition to Jesus' day, but there was no such concept at that time. The Greeks did not use it in a religious sense. Nor did the Jews of the time.
In Jesus' day... ekklesia -- a gathering of citizens called out from their homes into some public place, an assembly of the people convened at the public place of the council for the purpose of deliberating, the assembly of the Israelites (which had nothing to do with the Temple).
We know what you WANT to believe. We know what the RCC WANTS us to believe. And then there are the facts.
No...I am not saying Jesus said "I will build my assembly?". I am saying it is one of the definitions of the Greek word "ekklesia"..

I do not expect the Roman Catholic Church, as they so dub their cult, to ever be referred to as "The Roman Catholic Assembly"...

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#427196 Mar 12, 2013
192
Free Mind wrote:
More on Temple vs. ekklesia...
http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/e...
"... the metaphor of mater ecclesia appeared suddenly in late second-century patristic literature and without explanation. Yet, once the image was introduced, patristic writers continuously employed
mater ecclesia as an image characterizing the corporate identity of the church."
If Jesus said "ecclesia," why did it take almost 200 years for the term to appear in religious writings?
Nope, Jesus said TEMPLE, or nothing at all. The RCC made it up after the fact.
From the NABre pope approved Bible:

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.

Jesus’ 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.

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
Re-Programming Americans To Take Part In Their ... 4 min SouthernBelle 6
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min ROCCO 855,699
No one should blaspheme Prophet Mohammad, peace... 13 min Burke Devlin 667
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 29 min Bella Italia 40,721
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 33 min ChristineM 444,360
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 47 min Bella Italia 612,647
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 58 min USaWarringIDIOTSo... 177,219
The Christian Atheist debate 1 hr -Alan S Shole- 1,062
More from around the web