Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 653802 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.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#455374 Jun 22, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Put it this way sir, all known historians, scientists, atheist, and even the first couple hundred yrs of Protestanism do not argue against the Catholic Churches claim of compiling the Bible at the council of Hippo in 393 AD and the Council of Carthage in 397 AD and 417 AD.
I want you to pay close attention to the Books put forth for canon on August 28th, 397 AD: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth,Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, TOBIT,Judith, Esther, Ezra, MACCABEES 1 & 2 and the 27 Books of the current NT.
Tobit and 1 & 2 Maccabees!
This was the authority of the Church that compiled this Bible, and YES Eastern Orthodox were influential in determining the Bible too. But it took a council and an authoritive decision from the Church create a Bible when Christ never commanded it.
Do you see how ignorant one has to be in order to be an Evangelical?
wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_New_Tes...
wikipedia.org/wiki/Councils_of_Carthage
Neither the Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church “gave” the people the Bible. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit gave us the Bible. The Father out of love gave us Christ, Christ through His suffering gave us salvation, and the Holy Spirit gave us the Bible.
==========

In A.D. 363, THE COUNCIL OF LAODICEA stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches.

The COUNCIL OF HIPPO (A.D. 393) AND THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.

The Canon approved by the third Synod of Carthage (397 CE)

The first council that accepted the present New Testament canon was THE SYNOD OF HIPPO Regius in North Africa (393 CE); however, the acts of the council are lost. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the third Synod of Carthage
The Roman Catholic Church did not issue an authoritative statement about the contents of the Bible until 8 APRIL 1546, WHEN THE COUNCIL OF TRENT, by a vote of twenty-four to fifteen, with sixteen abstentions, declared the writings in Jerome's Latin Vulgate version to be the church's official canon.
==========
FOR THE ORTHODOX, THE RECOGNITION OF THESE WRITINGS AS AUTHORITATIVE WAS FORMALIZED
IN THE SECOND COUNCIL OF TRULLAN OF 692, ALTHOUGH IT WAS NEARLY UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED IN THE MID 300'S.
==========
THE SYNOD OF JERUSALEM[1] IN 1672
DECREED THE GREEK ORTHODOX CANON
WHICH IS THE SAME AS THE ONE DECIDED BY THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
BUT ADDS PSALM 151, 1 ESDRAS, 3 MACCABEES, 4 MACCABEES, AND PRAYER OF MANASSEH
==========

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#455375 Jun 22, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I love how you post Bible verses that are applying to you!!
Your pride won't allow you to see how Protestanism is explicitly defined in Rom 11:17
"And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree..."
Hello Confrint?? How many branches broke off from the Catholic Church? Are you guys not a wild bunch -- each charting your own path thru Christianity!
Bible readers are all USERS of words ... morphing and twisting the words to suit the individual believers.

Confrinting with words just happens to be extra-stupid. He condemns Catholics for what they believe, while he uses the words that of which they approved in the new testament for what he chooses to believe.

It doesn't get more ridiculous that THAT!

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#455376 Jun 22, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
June, your ideas are really not yours.
Some are my own and some are words from others.

But I don't follow the words of any theologians as being based on truth.

That is where you and I differ.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#455377 Jun 22, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do atheist believe they've arrived at atheism thru a superior intelligence....ie they are just smarter than the believers ??
IQ has nothing to do with belief in God.
I suggest you read a book called "Proof of Heaven" about an intelligent Neurosurgeon and atheist who has a NDE. His superior understanding of the brain and review of the data during death, convinced him his brain could not possibly have continued on momentarily with thoughts. Plus, according to him, the next life is way more real than this one. Everyone that has life belongs to God who created it. You can't escape Him. You're eternally bound by the Creator June.
But you don't fool anyone on this forum. We can see you're a spiritual train wreck. And you'd probably believe in God if its weren't for your militant feminism being at odds with a moral Diety!!
Atheists can no more prove by reason or empirical science that there isn't a God than we can prove by reason or empirical science that there is a God. God cannot be measured through these mediums

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#455378 Jun 22, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
We agree on something who would have thought.
It is pretty silly but I have heard sillier.
It is plain that your myths are silly to others, just as their myths are silly to you.

Once you catch on (if ever you choose TO catch on) to that idea, you will stop placing any importance on your own favorite myths.

But until then, your favorite biblical scriptures will keep you dangling with a noose around your own neck from a non-existent Christian "heaven" ... where incidentally, a Jew would not be caught dead OR alive.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#455379 Jun 22, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>Atheists can no more prove by reason or empirical science that there isn't a God than we can prove by reason or empirical science that there is a God. God cannot be measured through these mediums
You're the one bragging not only that a god exists, but that the god of Jews loves your version of Christianity.

The burden of proof is on you, and you have none.

Words in a book can't prove that the words have anything in common with truth ... and that is the truth.

By the way,(within the theology) do you believe that when Jesus was dying on the cross, that he had already converted to Christianity?

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 53:1.--6 "MATT 10:27"

#455380 Jun 22, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
I love how you post Bible verses that are applying to you!!
Your pride won't allow you to see how Protestanism is explicitly defined in Rom 11:17
"And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree..."
Hello Confrint?? How many branches broke off from the Catholic Church? Are you guys not a wild bunch -- each charting your own path thru Christianity!
~~~

We are not perfect...but at least we are connected to the true vine...

of which your conjecture fables myths rituals and calisthenics have

no connection..either in the Old or New testament

Judaism or Christianity...
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#455381 Jun 22, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>,snipped for space.
Trent's decree was strictly in response to and a defense against the protestors tearing out books of the bible.

"Likewise it has been said: Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis one book, Exodus one book, Leviticus one book, Numbers one book, Deuteronomy one book, Josue Nave one book, Judges one book, Ruth one book, Kings four books, Paralipomenon two books, Psalms one book, Solomon three books, Proverbs one book, Ecclesiastes one book, Canticle of Canticles one book, likewise Wisdom one book, Ecclesiasticus one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,with Ginoth, that is, with his lamentations, Ezechiel one book,Daniel one book, Osee one book, Micheas one book, Joel one book, Abdias one book, Jonas one book, Nahum one book, Habacuc one book, Sophonias one book, Aggeus one book, Zacharias one book, Malachias one book. Likewise the order of the histories. Job one book, Tobias one book, Esdras two books, Esther one book, Judith one book, Machabees two books. Likewise the order of the writings of the New and eternal Testament, which only the holy and Catholic Church supports. Of the Gospels, according to Matthew one book, according to Mark one book, according to Luke one book, according to John one book. The Epistles of Paul [the apostle] in number fourteen. To the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Ephesians one, to the Thessalonians two, to the Galatians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one. Likewise the Apocalypse of John, one book. And the Acts of the Apostles one book. Likewise the canonical epistles in number seven. Of Peter the Apostle two epistles, of James the Apostle one epistle, of John the Apostle one epistle, of another John, the presbyter, two epistles, of Jude the Zealut, the Apostle one epistle." Pope Damasus (regn. A.D. 366-384), Decree of the Council of Rome, The Canon of Scripture (A.D. 382).

"Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read, in the church under the title of divine writings.'. The canonical books are:---Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, the two books of Paraleipomena (Chronicles), Job, the Psalms of David, the five books of Solomon, the twelve books of the (Minor) Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament are:---the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, one Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, two Epistles of S. Peter, three Epistles of S. John, the Epistle of S. James, the Epistle of S. Jude, the Revelation of S. John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church shall be consulted." Council of Hippo, Canon 36 (A.D. 393).

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#455382 Jun 22, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
Pfft.
Christians follow the guy all the time.
And he's been dead for 2000 year.
YEAH ... they follow that Jesus guy into wars ... burning innocent humans at the stake as heretics and witches. And they brag about how Jesus will save them while the devil burns others in hell and on and on and on.

They are quite the "followers" of Jesus.

Sarcasm intended.

Since: Sep 09

Quesnel, Canada

#455383 Jun 22, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~
We are not perfect...but at least we are connected to the true vine...
Silly you!!!

:)

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 53:1.--6 "MATT 10:27"

#455384 Jun 22, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Silly you!!!
:)
Pro_14:16 A wise man feareth, and departeth from evil: but the fool rageth, and is confident.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#455385 Jun 22, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="atemcowboy"]sor ry kay but I disagree with you saying it went bad. everything that I said, I backed up with the word of God. I cant help the problem that she has understanding English.
It was not bad on my part only the catholics could disagree with what thus saith the Lord.
you had no problem understanding the battle that was ongoing. they have eyes but they see not, they have ears but they don't understand.
*******
I understood what you were saying...just that Mary was a human as the rest of us. The Catholics were terribly offended, because they see her as a goddess.
I don't think that she was 'neglectful'. I think that she thought that He was fellow-shipping with other youth in their group, and didn't notice until it was time to go to bed that night. It was just one day. The other days were involved in a search for Him. It took time because He was not playing with other 12 year old boys; He was discussing serious matters with the priests in the temple. The priests were amazed at His knowledge.
KayMarie
It is better for someone to be offended in this world rather than the one to come, if people stop to think about it, the walled city of Jerusalem was not and is not very large, and with the jewish people, everything started and stops with their religion, so mary should have started at the temple first, then looked elsewhere. where was this boy all of that time, where did he sleep and where did he eat. no one knows.

this was not a time like our caravans heading out west, where the children would have maybe been inside covered wagons.

and when all is said and done, two of the Four Gospels are not favorable to her and John who might have been the disciple who she was given to, was neutral. only Luke, who probably never knew her was favorable. as the link that I showed stated.

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#455386 Jun 22, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
YEAH ... they follow that Jesus guy into wars ... burning innocent humans at the stake as heretics and witches. And they brag about how Jesus will save them while the devil burns others in hell and on and on and on.
They are quite the "followers" of Jesus.
Sarcasm intended.
I don't need your sarcasm.

And no one needs Jesus to do evil.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#455387 Jun 22, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. This word represents the proper name of the person being addressed by the angel, and it therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates a perfection of grace that is both intensive and extensive. This means that the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit, and was not only as "full" or strong or complete as possible at any given time, but it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence to have been called "full of grace."
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/immaculate-con...
Ill be over your house tomorrow with some lamb and ouzo. You can teach me Greek
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#455388 Jun 22, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>Neither the Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church “gave” the people the Bible. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit gave us the Bible. The Father out of love gave us Christ, Christ through His suffering gave us salvation, and the Holy Spirit gave us the Bible.
==========
In A.D. 363, THE COUNCIL OF LAODICEA stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches.
The COUNCIL OF HIPPO (A.D. 393) AND THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.
The Canon approved by the third Synod of Carthage (397 CE)
The first council that accepted the present New Testament canon was THE SYNOD OF HIPPO Regius in North Africa (393 CE); however, the acts of the council are lost. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the third Synod of Carthage
The Roman Catholic Church did not issue an authoritative statement about the contents of the Bible until 8 APRIL 1546, WHEN THE COUNCIL OF TRENT, by a vote of twenty-four to fifteen, with sixteen abstentions, declared the writings in Jerome's Latin Vulgate version to be the church's official canon.
==========
FOR THE ORTHODOX, THE RECOGNITION OF THESE WRITINGS AS AUTHORITATIVE WAS FORMALIZED
IN THE SECOND COUNCIL OF TRULLAN OF 692, ALTHOUGH IT WAS NEARLY UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED IN THE MID 300'S.
==========
THE SYNOD OF JERUSALEM[1] IN 1672
DECREED THE GREEK ORTHODOX CANON
WHICH IS THE SAME AS THE ONE DECIDED BY THE COUNCIL OF TRENT
BUT ADDS PSALM 151, 1 ESDRAS, 3 MACCABEES, 4 MACCABEES, AND PRAYER OF MANASSEH
==========
I don't see us differing to much onthis. I narrowed mine down a little.

I do have a couple issues with your post though.
The Council of Laodicea didn't establish any official canon. And they only acknowledged 26 NT Books to be read at Mass (The Book of Revelation was not yet considered sacred scripture). And they gave a list of OT books to be allowed for Mass too, but it wasn't exactly the same Books that would later be installed.

I noticed you forgot the Council of Rome in 382 AD which set into motion a Biblical compilation for Christianity. Led by the authority of Pope Damaseus.
Not to start a fight today, but the reason the Council of Rome was called in 382 AD was so the Pope could put a stop to the Roman Emperor Theodosius's decision to install a candidate for Archbishop of Constantanople. Rome opposed any such influence from a Emperor.(more proof that Constantine could not have infliltrated Christianity)

wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#455389 Jun 22, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Trent's decree was strictly in response to and a defense against the protestors tearing out books of the bible.
"Likewise it has been said: Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis one book, Exodus one book, Leviticus one book, Numbers one book, Deuteronomy one book, Josue Nave one book, Judges one book, Ruth one book, Kings four books, Paralipomenon two books, Psalms one book, Solomon three books, Proverbs one book, Ecclesiastes one book, Canticle of Canticles one book, likewise Wisdom one book, Ecclesiasticus one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,with Ginoth, that is, with his lamentations, Ezechiel one book,Daniel one book, Osee one book, Micheas one book, Joel one book, Abdias one book, Jonas one book, Nahum one book, Habacuc one book, Sophonias one book, Aggeus one book, Zacharias one book, Malachias one book. Likewise the order of the histories. Job one book, Tobias one book, Esdras two books, Esther one book, Judith one book, Machabees two books. Likewise the order of the writings of the New and eternal Testament, which only the holy and Catholic Church supports. Of the Gospels, according to Matthew one book, according to Mark one book, according to Luke one book, according to John one book. The Epistles of Paul [the apostle] in number fourteen. To the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Ephesians one, to the Thessalonians two, to the Galatians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one. Likewise the Apocalypse of John, one book. And the Acts of the Apostles one book. Likewise the canonical epistles in number seven. Of Peter the Apostle two epistles, of James the Apostle one epistle, of John the Apostle one epistle, of another John, the presbyter, two epistles, of Jude the Zealut, the Apostle one epistle." Pope Damasus (regn. A.D. 366-384), Decree of the Council of Rome, The Canon of Scripture (A.D. 382).
"Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read, in the church under the title of divine writings.'. The canonical books are:---Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, the two books of Paraleipomena (Chronicles), Job, the Psalms of David, the five books of Solomon, the twelve books of the (Minor) Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament are:---the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, one Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, two Epistles of S. Peter, three Epistles of S. John, the Epistle of S. James, the Epistle of S. Jude, the Revelation of S. John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church shall be consulted." Council of Hippo, Canon 36 (A.D. 393).
Thanks for the info Anthony. It helps me cause I can add that to what I have about the Bible in my files.

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#455390 Jun 22, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for defending her...I guess. No, we don't see her as a goddess. We see her as the Mother of God the Son, full of grace, blessed for all generations, not just an average sinner like the rest of us.
YOU ARE THE LIAR that said she was filled with the Holy Ghost three times. how your church fathers(think God they are not ours) could tell that lie, knowing that Our Savior said He had to go BEFORE the holy Ghost could be sent back, is beyond me and God.

and for you, who probably owns a Bible and can read, can read that for yourself and know they lied about Mary.

you claim that you don't claim her as a goddess yet you call her the Mother of God. double talk and worse. it is Blasphemy and your rcc will be destroyed by that little baby Boy birthed by her some day. who now sits on the Right Hand of His Father.
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#455391 Jun 22, 2013
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>It is better for someone to be offended in this world rather than the one to come, if people stop to think about it, the walled city of Jerusalem was not and is not very large, and with the jewish people, everything started and stops with their religion, so mary should have started at the temple first, then looked elsewhere. where was this boy all of that time, where did he sleep and where did he eat. no one knows.
this was not a time like our caravans heading out west, where the children would have maybe been inside covered wagons.
and when all is said and done, two of the Four Gospels are not favorable to her and John who might have been the disciple who she was given to, was neutral. only Luke, who probably never knew her was favorable. as the link that I showed stated.
You're not going to stop trashing on Mary are ya? You must have really deep rooted hatred for the Catholic Church to use Mary as collateral in your rant.
JESUS WAS NOT A CHILD AT 12!! He was probably the equivalent of a 17 or 18 yr old in today's society. Was His Mother worried?? Yeah. I would worry to if i didn't know where my 18 yr old kid was. But I sure as heck wouldn't be bad parent for not knowing. Christ would have already graduated from the Jewish equivalent of High School back then. He would have already been working as a Carpenter. I a another yr or two, he would have found a wife and had children if He was a normal 12 yr old Jewish boy.

Man you can really be stupid sometimes Preston. I really am so glad i didn't have one of you guys introducing me to Christianity.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#455392 Jun 22, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>Ill be over your house tomorrow with some lamb and ouzo. You can teach me Greek
I "speaka no Grick", but I've got the accent down pretty good. I've already got Ouzo, bring dolmades.
Clay

Saint Paul, MN

#455393 Jun 22, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~
We are not perfect...but at least we are connected to the true vine...
of which your conjecture fables myths rituals and calisthenics have
no connection..either in the Old or New testament
Judaism or Christianity...
You wouldn't dare explore Catholicism. If you did, you would see the topology and the connections to the OT are unique amongst all of Christendom.
You only can trace your roots to 20th century America and thats it. The rest of your religion is trying to navigate a Christiainty with SOME of the word of God. You are missing a few Books...

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) 5 min Hukt on Fonix 63,591
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 7 min onemale 281,846
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Hangman 973,726
I prefer women's satin panties over men's under... 13 min Blondie 25
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 55 min WasteWater 106,482
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr WasteWater 2,570
You are of your father......THE DEVIL. 1 hr WasteWater 22
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr New Age Spiritual... 618,731
More from around the web