Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 555,181
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
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.

Since: Mar 13

Location hidden

#427197 Mar 12, 2013
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no clear evidence one way or another regarding homosexuality. It occurs not only in humans but in the animal kingdom. I am sure there are many people that you know are gay but you probably aren't aware of it.
Today, our world is becoming a much more compassionate world and as evidence in america that gay marriages is being accepted more all the time.
Are you predujidced against gay people?
Hatred and ignorance is why we have so many problems today in our world. Suicide rates among gay/lesbians is much greater than the general population, I can't believe someone would choose such a lifestyle only to be ostricized by ignorant people like yourself,.
I myself am hetrosexual, but I am way beyond critizing and marginalizing someone who is different than me. You are a long way from there.
If you had a son or daughter or a grand child or parent that stated they were gay would you disown them?.........you probably would.......very sad!
Stanley seems to think (and he usually things right) that you are wrong 'that there are many people that you know who are gay'...is just a line of generalities which means a line of bullschidt.

Heterosexuals know very few Queers and avoid their cliques like the plague. If you were to ask ALL non Queers in here if they partook of Queers companies and public esstablishments, you would get a resounding NO.

Remember the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ.."if a man layeth with a man, it would be better if that man tied a millstone around his neck and cast himself into the sea".

I agree with Stanley on this one.
endtime

AOL

#427198 Mar 12, 2013
.

----#---- NEXT POPE is ANTICHRIST

http://youtu.be/Co9oADUSi08


.
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427199 Mar 12, 2013
Sickd wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
You actually believe the church is about money, power and control?

What would ever make you believe that?
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427200 Mar 12, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
185
<quoted text>
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!!!!
If God didn't like me very much he could inflict a terrible disease upon me, or make me walk out in front of a speeding bus, as has happened to thousands of others.

I'm Still here and enjoying my life to the fullest, and I know that bothers you immensely!

A belief can never be the actual truth, for a belief to become the actual truth wouldn't make it a belief anymore.

Everyone of every belief says the same as you. That they are the enlightened ones.

Jewish clerics claim that catholics interpret much of the Old and New testament incorrectly. Catholics claim that protestants interpret the Old and New testament incorrectly.

Will the real winner please stand up!!

MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427201 Mar 12, 2013
Stan-an-Ollie wrote:
<quoted text>Stanley seems to think (and he usually things right) that you are wrong 'that there are many people that you know who are gay'...is just a line of generalities which means a line of bullschidt.
Heterosexuals know very few Queers and avoid their cliques like the plague. If you were to ask ALL non Queers in here if they partook of Queers companies and public esstablishments, you would get a resounding NO.
Remember the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ.."if a man layeth with a man, it would be better if that man tied a millstone around his neck and cast himself into the sea".
I agree with Stanley on this one.
I will bet your mother is a lesbian. She just hasn't told you yet. Sorry for the bad news, but somebody had to tell it.
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427202 Mar 12, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
185
<quoted text>
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!!!!
He had 33 years to convince everyone that he was the son of God and yet still, nobody believed him. Thats not good PR work!

Tricks, and miracles didn't convince anyone of his power, why? What was the purpose in the NT to report miracles if they had no affect on his outcome?

Remember it was a tiny crowd that determined this mans fate. The crowd had a choice 50/50, Jesus or Barabas. Flip a coin, red or black, even or odd. Not a very good way to determines someones fate.

Just a very short time before the crucifixion, scriptures claim this man Jesus was loved and followed by all. He had to preach from a fishing boat off shore in the Red sea, because the crowds of followers was so large there was no room for him on land to preach. Jesusmania!

..What happened in that very short period of time that changed everyones mind, between everyone loving Jesus to everyone hating Jesus? Are some pages from the NT missing?

...makes no common sense!



“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#427203 Mar 12, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>

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.
Skip the non-Christian texts - I wasn't referring to them. Breathe.....

As for skipping the non-canonical texts like GoThomas, which is only sayings by Jesus, you do disregard them and those are also recorded, so you are still a hypocrite.
guest wrote:
<quoted text>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.
You should be quoting Jesus. I'm not 100% sure, but belief in Jesus ("Isa") is required to be Muslim.

Looks like they have met the qualifier as Oxbow designates, "believe in Jesus".

Maybe you should use his teachings. After all, they too were approved by men to use (Islam), which does fir your "recorded" scenario as well.

What exactly is your point, because you keep voiding it out, by proving by your own words it was an invalid statement.

You really don't understand your religion or others, huh? Sounds like you were handed a Bible and then said to, I'll lead you in the Way.

It didn't work, did it?
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
Then don't say you believe in Jesus, when clearly you don't believe in ALL of Jesus.

Oh, I'm keeping "score", you can count on that. FYI - I will call you out on your false assertions, just so that you don't lead others astray from gaining, this thing we refer to as "salvation".

If you want to insult me - please do it through viable and supportive information, because "what comes out of your mouth" will surely be what I will agree to or disagree.

I truly hope you aren't thin-skinned.

:o)
guest wrote:
<quoted text>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.
No I didn't read those posts you say you expressed this "belief" in. Do you have the post number, because I will go look for it and read it.

Man, throwing out the beliefs of men, again? Where does "God" say that any non-canonical text with Christian origins is "un-Christian" to quote?

Why do you follow those men who have specifically described the belief that you believe?

IMO - you should have researched it before joining up and thinking it is all true.

BTW - that would be Self.

Move past the words and understand their meanings.
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#427204 Mar 12, 2013
Stan-an-Ollie wrote:
<quoted text>Stanley seems to think (and he usually things right) that you are wrong 'that there are many people that you know who are gay'...is just a line of generalities which means a line of bullschidt.
Heterosexuals know very few Queers and avoid their cliques like the plague. If you were to ask ALL non Queers in here if they partook of Queers companies and public esstablishments, you would get a resounding NO.
Remember the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ.."if a man layeth with a man, it would be better if that man tied a millstone around his neck and cast himself into the sea".
I agree with Stanley on this one.
If you could combine the brain knowledge of Stanley and Ollie together you still wouldn't come up with a working brain.

Sorry for the bad news! but the truth must be told.

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min Dave Nelson 765,449
Respecting Gays is one way to go to Heaven 13 min andet1987 49
loan shark needed (Apr '14) 28 min lookingloan123 11
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 43 min Rick in Kansas 263,691
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Dr Wu 603,720
women: who are the most attractive celebrities? 1 hr andet1987 2
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Remnant of 144000 39,169
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 4 hr BottomNow 1,191
Dubai massage Body To Body full service 0559... (Feb '14) 8 hr Dubai Massage 055... 141

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE