Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 654272 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.

Just Sayin

Nashville, TN

#453081 Jun 17, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Scripture alone (from the Reformation slogan Sola Scriptura) is the teaching that Scripture is the Church's only infallible and sufficient rule for deciding issues of faith and practices that involve doctrines. While the Bible does not contain all knowledge, it does contain that which is necessary for salvation. Indeed, if something is not found in Scripture, it is not binding upon the believer. This view does not deny that the Church has the authority to teach God's Word. Furthermore, while tradition is valuable, it but must be tested by the higher authority of the Scriptures.
Fie! You protestants take the same Bible and one decides that baptism is necessary for salvation while the other one says "Nay,'tisn't!"
Is the Bible supposed to stand up, open it's mouth and declare which one is correct?

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453082 Jun 17, 2013
No matter what is posted, those in Christianity will insist that a god of the Jews favors Christians.

Imagine Ann Coulter bragging to a Jew that Christians are "perfected" Jews.

The arrogance and the stupidity is beyond belief.

Dan

Omaha, NE

#453083 Jun 17, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why did he GET married???
Because he took a shine to Mrs. Luther.

He got married 5 years after he was excommunicated.
truth

Huntingdale, Australia

#453084 Jun 17, 2013
who is god enki e nk i..
Just Sayin

Nashville, TN

#453085 Jun 17, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Message: Only Scripture is needed for the man of God to be perfect, thoroughly finished unto good works...
If he needs more, he is not the man of God, nor is he perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Which includes all Catholics...because they need more than the Bible!!!!!
Paul was talking to Timothy, his successor, as one of the main leaders of the Church. AS Timothy was a part of the Church, it went without saying that Timothy would also benefit from Her teachings in his journey toward "perfection", along with Scripture.
There was no such thing as "Bible alone". That's been proven.
It was never "just me-n-Jesus" until very recently when fundies threw everything else about Christianity away.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453086 Jun 17, 2013
The one god that favors Jews wants all his children home. He left his "calling card" in the old testament.

He wants those referring to their selves as Catholics, Muslims and Protestants to turn their lives around and stop worshipping images of gods with no names.

But they don't pay heed to his warnings. They just keep insisting that the god loves them and ONLY them.

He can't do any more than warn them to stop preaching false doctrines and join Judaism.

If they don't pay heed, they WILL pay the penalty for blasphemy and heresy.

Tongue in cheek

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453087 Jun 17, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Because he took a shine to Mrs. Luther.
He got married 5 years after he was excommunicated.
But his plan WAS to get married ... so he ordered god to change the doctrines to suit his own will.

But he was not alone. Earlier on even popes were married, and they taught that the god of the Jews ordained THAT to be so.

If you can't see that religion was what the men ordained to be ... you are choosing to stay blind to the lies ... and that onus is on you.
Roberta G

Chicago, IL

#453088 Jun 17, 2013
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
You said, quote, "The sin they committed was sexual in nature. They were told not to touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. That tree was Satan. Want proof? Read the 31st chapter of Ezekiel. Spiritual beings were called trees sometimes and in Ezekiel 31 it states that the "trees" in Eden envied him because of his beauty etc, etc. Now a tree does not have the ability to envy but an angelic being does. Satan sexed Eve up and she conceived Cain by him. Much of what is written in Genesis concerning those events are METAPHORICAL but you misled Christians have made them literal which is why you guys are completely confused as to what really happened in Eden." End quote.

It has been a long time since I have heard anyone speak of the old Serpent seed doctrine? LOL LOL LOL That doctrine is as old as the hills and is a lie from hell. You must be a disciple of William Branham. The serpent spawned Branham and you are his follower. One of your favorite verses to twist is Genesis 3:13. Genesis 3:13, "Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." You interpret the word "deceived" in a sexual context as do all the Branhamites.

According to your theology, the serpent fathered Cain and Adam fathered Abel. That being said, when Cain killed Abel all future generations must be "children of the serpent" because Cain survived and reprodu

ced and Abel, the son of Adam, was dead. What does that make you Tony17? Think about it.
By the way, who are "you misled Christians" you speak of?

You said, quote, "However way back when we also thought as you guys do about what happened in Eden but within the last fifty years or so God has unsealed many things and KNOWLEDGE HAS BEEN INCREASED. Glory be to God." End quote.
BOLOGNA. You have been deceived.
Bravo :)
Just Sayin

Nashville, TN

#453089 Jun 17, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you call 42,000+ conflicting, and contradicting Protestant denominations "UNITED"! Hardly the case!! If 3 bible verses were the basis of Protestant unity then why does each divided, splintered and fractured denomination continue to "spin off" more and more, each day, each month, each year, with some favoring and some opposing abortion, gay ministers, euthenasia, homosexual marriage, embroyonic stem cell research, etc. Hate to disappoint you OLDJG but your bible verses have never, nor will ever, hold your bible only "self interpreting" inconsistent denominations together. Your 42,000+ self appointed Protestant Popes won't allow it---that it why the ONLY UNITY that bible only Protestants have (ever had)---and even that is weak---- since the Reformation, is to "attack" the TRUTH of Jesus Christs One (and only one) TRUE Apostolic Catholic Church.
So true.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453090 Jun 17, 2013
From the book "The History Of Christianity ... The Church from the Reformation to the Present, Volume 2, by Clyde L. Manschreck ... comes the following........

Dedicated to the austere ideals of Cluny, Gregory sought to enforce clerical celibacy not only as a purer state but as a means of freeing the church from the world. In1074 he prohibited future marriages and ordered married priests to dismiss their wives or give up reading mass. Clerical marriage from his viewpoint was no better than fornication. Laymen were urged not to take the sacraments from such guilty priests. Havoc resulted. Priests were insulted, tortured; some were driven to suicide, some even murdered. Legal wives became harlots, and legitimate children, bastards. But Gregory moved relentlessly forward, unseating bishops who opposed him, especially in the north. He enforced clerical celibacy, but at a great price and without permanence, for at the time of the Reformation in the sixteenth century the church was licensing clerical concubines and taxing the children of bishops.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453091 Jun 17, 2013
From the book, Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven … Uta Ranke-Heinemann

The same disapproval of pleasure affected the priestly way of life, which had to be remote from the moral slums of everyday existence. Hostility to marriage logically leads to the celibate life of the priesthood. And so it is no wonder that the great Mariologist and despiser of marriage, Pope Siricus, stood in the orefront of the battle against the marriage of priests. He had a decisive influence on the development of celibacy when in his letter to the Spanish bishop Himerius of Tarragona (385) he labeled it a crimen for priests to continue having relationships with their wives after their ordination. He called that an abscoena cupiditas.(At the beginning of the evolution of celibacy most priests were still married; only after 1139 were priests no longer allowed to marry.)
Just Sayin

Nashville, TN

#453092 Jun 17, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
Where are you Just Sayin'?????
Since the man of God is "thoroughly furnished" by all scripture, inspired of God, unto good works....what else is necessary????!!!! How can he be more "thoroughly furnished"????!!!!
thoroughly: completely
Timothy was a leader in the Church. Of course the Church was to help him on his way to "perfection." He was a member of it.
If the Church is not necessary, as you are saying here, then why did Jesus establish one? Was He just bored?
Why didn't He simply pass out Bibles instead?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#453093 Jun 17, 2013
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Fie! You protestants take the same Bible and one decides that baptism is necessary for salvation while the other one says "Nay,'tisn't!"
Is the Bible supposed to stand up, open it's mouth and declare which one is correct?
Ox's pasted post:

"Scripture alone (from the Reformation slogan Sola Scriptura) is the teaching that Scripture is the Church's only infallible and sufficient rule for deciding issues of faith and practices that involve doctrines. While the Bible does not contain all knowledge, it does contain that which is necessary for salvation. Indeed, if something is not found in Scripture, it is not binding upon the believer. This view does not deny that the Church has the authority to teach God's Word. Furthermore, while tradition is valuable, it but must be tested by the higher authority of the Scriptures. "

This paragraph is replete with contradiction.

It admits that the Bible does not contain all knowledge, declares despite this that the Bible contains that which is necessary for Salvation, and then concludes that any teaching not expressed in scripture is subordinate to Scripture.

The conclusion presented isn't IN scripture-it's a statement to ratify the belief, but it isn't scriptural that there's a stratification, by medium, of the authoritative teaching of God's Word.
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#453094 Jun 17, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Scripture alone (from the Reformation slogan Sola Scriptura) is the teaching that Scripture is the Church's only infallible and sufficient rule for deciding issues of faith and practices that involve doctrines. While the Bible does not contain all knowledge, it does contain that which is necessary for salvation. Indeed, if something is not found in Scripture, it is not binding upon the believer. This view does not deny that the Church has the authority to teach God's Word. Furthermore, while tradition is valuable, it but must be tested by the higher authority of the Scriptures.
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Fie! You protestants take the same Bible and one decides that baptism is necessary for salvation while the other one says "Nay,'tisn't!"
Is the Bible supposed to stand up, open it's mouth and declare which one is correct?
Let's ask this question as well. Did the Bible stand up, open it's mouth and declare which of your popes was correct in their interpretation? Please do not lie and tell us your theology has never changed. We can and have presented the fallacy of that argument over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Comprende'

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453095 Jun 17, 2013
Religion was for the most part about theft of property and gaining control over the minds of others who were forced to convert or die.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>

Din Timelines

World History Timelines

755
x - Pippin the Short
b.714-d.sep 24 768 donates land taken from the Lombards to the papacy
Dan

Omaha, NE

#453096 Jun 17, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
But his plan WAS to get married ... so he ordered god to change the doctrines to suit his own will.
But he was not alone. Earlier on even popes were married, and they taught that the god of the Jews ordained THAT to be so.
If you can't see that religion was what the men ordained to be ... you are choosing to stay blind to the lies ... and that onus is on you.
There's no indication that his reforms were aimed at getting himself hitched. He was a priest at the time, was excommunicated in 1520 and met the future Mrs. Luther in 1523.

Affirming your claims that the protestant reformation was undertaken so Martin Luther could get married is actually YOUR burden, June. You claim it, you back it up. That's how it rolls.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453097 Jun 17, 2013
The Catholic empire did not become one of the wealthiest organizations on earth by being kind.

The trail of blood and tears and suffering goes back to the beginning of Catholicism and it's lies that a Jewish god sent his son to earth to save only Catholics.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>

Athanasian Creed
1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith
Just Sayin

Nashville, TN

#453098 Jun 17, 2013
Religion A Delusion wrote:
<quoted text>
A=lmost to the light.
Soon you will learn our ways.
He was boiled for us, you know.
Hey Religion, over the weekend I read most of the Gospel of the FSM and laughed so hard I peed myself. I hadn't laughed like that in a long time. Thanks!
truth

Huntingdale, Australia

#453099 Jun 17, 2013
Why you against me?

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#453100 Jun 17, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
There's no indication that his reforms were aimed at getting himself hitched. He was a priest at the time, was excommunicated in 1520 and met the future Mrs. Luther in 1523.
Affirming your claims that the protestant reformation was undertaken so Martin Luther could get married is actually YOUR burden, June. You claim it, you back it up. That's how it rolls.
You can keep lying if it so pleases you ... but if there is a god that serves only Jews ... you are in over your head with lies upon lies.

I suggest you keep THAT in mind.

You can manipulate other people, but you can't manipulate a god ... if that god just HAPPENS to exist.

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Dr Banonator 64,301
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 13 min Truth Teller 106,580
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 13 min crucifiedguy 281,925
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 49 min Steve III 497
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Steve III 45,259
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr bad bob 183,189
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr ImFree2Choose 2,594
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr Gabriel 973,912
Queen Cleopatra was clearly Black. White people... (Aug '10) 3 hr Peter Ross 842
More from around the web