Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 603170 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: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#465991 Jul 26, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>I had an experince last week and can relate to why these religionists have turned you against them.
I saw a story here on Topix. The source was the FreeRepublic ( a christian site). I read the article and the comments on FreeRepublic.
I signed up and posted a comment to someone. I included Matt. 25:31-46 and asked them where to find the get out of jail free card for that passage.
I was promptly banned.
I've never been banned by Topix moderators, although several disgruntled religionists have tried their best to have me removed.

I have however had warnings.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#465992 Jul 26, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>Kersey Graves and The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors (2003)
Richard Carrier
[Editor's note: This is a conflation of three responses which were made by Richard Carrier to feedback and e-mail involving questions about the scholarhip of Kersey Graves, in particular, and about scholarship, in general, in the subject area about which Graves concerned himself in The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors.]
The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors: Or Christianity Before Christ is unreliable, but no comprehensive critique exists. Most scholars immediately recognize many of his findings as unsupported and dismiss Graves as useless. After all, a scholar who rarely cites a source isn't useful to have as a reference even if he is right. For examples of specific problems, however, see Hare Jesus: Christianity's Hindu Heritage, and some generally poor but not always incorrect Christian rebuttals. A very helpful discussion of related methodological problems by renowned scholar Bruce Metzger is also well worth reading ("Methodology in the Study of the Mystery Religions and Early Christianity" 2002). In general, even when the evidence is real, it often only appears many years after Christianity began, and thus might be evidence of diffusion in the other direction. Another typical problem is that Graves draws far too much from what often amounts to rather vague evidence. In general, there are ten kinds of problems that crop up in Graves' work here and there:
Graves often does not distinguish his opinions and theories from what his sources and evidence actually state.
Graves often omits important sources and evidence.
Graves often mistreats in a biased or anachronistic way the sources he does use.
Graves occasionally relies on suspect sources.
Graves does little or no source analysis or formal textual criticism.
Graves' work is totally uninformed by modern social history (a field that did not begin to be formally pursued until after World War II, i.e., after Graves died).
Graves' conclusions and theories often far exceed what the evidence justifies, and he treats both speculations and sound theories as of equal value.
Graves often ignores important questions of chronology and the actual order of plausible historical influence, and completely disregards the methodological problems this creates.
Graves' work lacks all humility, which is unconscionable given the great uncertainties that surround the sketchy material he had to work with.
Graves' scholarship is obsolete, having been vastly improved upon by new methods, materials, discoveries, and textual criticism in the century since he worked. In fact, almost every historical work written before 1950 is regarded as outdated and untrustworthy by historians today.
All this is not to say Graves didn't have some things right. But you will never be able to tell what he has right from what he has wrong without totally redoing all his research and beyond, which makes him utterly useless to historians as a source.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richar...
We all pick and choose our own preferred history.

Religion is a prime example of such favoritism. "My religion is true and yours is false ... blah, blah, blah!"

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#465993 Jul 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU WROTE
"I wish they would all leave me alone to love who I want to love."
:)"
_____
IT IS BY YOUR OWN VOLITION THAT YOU ARE HERE POSTING ON THIS FORUM
Be an adult for once ...in something ..and take responsibility for your own options/actions.
No one is forcing you to read or post here...
I suggest you read again what I posted, as I was not referring to my self. I was making a spoof about the supposed god that live in your imagination.

June VanDerMark wrote:

<quoted text>
If a god loves you (a Protestant) and disowns Catholics, he is one messed up ex-Jewish god!

:)

God talking to his self ... "Well, let's see now ... I first committed to love only the Jews ... but then the Catholics talked me into loving only them. But now KayMarie is even more persuasive than were those Catholics, so I guess I will flatter KayMarie as being the special one of the day. I wish they would all leave me alone to love who I want to love."

:)

“Free gift means FREE”

Since: Jan 09

Chicagoland

#465994 Jul 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
We all pick and choose our own preferred history.
Religion is a prime example of such favoritism. "My religion is true and yours is false ... blah, blah, blah!"
Everyone has a world view. Not just those of "religion".

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#465995 Jul 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
It means to you what you DESIRE it should mean. Those are the tactics of all religious word-manipulators.
~~~
THERE IS NO PERSON ON THIS FORUM
That works harder to be a manipulator THAN YOURSELF...

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#465996 Jul 26, 2013
According to the earlier Jews, there were multiple gods in existence.

Then some of the break-away Jews created the one-god dogma to in turn create the illusion that they were the one-god's chosen few.

Now these mud-running Jews and Christians and Muslims, all want center stage in the RUSH to believe a god favors ONLY them.

Stupid people!

If I were to believe in the existence of one god, it would only be fair of me to believe that all of them existed along with their goddess companions.

I won't favor your image of a god and state that those other images of gods and goddesses were simply illusion and your one god is REAL.

It would take a complete idiot to believe that was based on truth.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#465997 Jul 26, 2013
who="Osas7" Has This Passage Ever Bothered You?
Matthew 25:31-46 - Works Salvation?
http://www.faithalone.org/magazine/y1988/88ma...
The Judgment of
Matthew 25:31-46
http://www.faithalone.org/magazine/y2011/11E2...
**********

This is not 'works' salvation. It is...the Bible says...a JUDGMENT.
It judges between those who SAY they are good, and those who obey the gospel.

The conscience of the born again is troubled by the need of others, and they will 'feed the hungry','cloth the naked', etc.

The ones who do not do this will be judged 'guilty' of a lack of love.

KayMarie

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#465998 Jul 26, 2013
Osas7 wrote:
<quoted text>Everyone has a world view. Not just those of "religion".
I agree! But according to many devout religious believers (who only place high value on their own religions)... Atheists and other religionists have a misguided view of all issues and those in their own specialized religions have a "guided" view of all issues.

The imbalance is evident
For those who want to SEE
Look into the mirror
Self-inspection is the KEY

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

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

#465999 Jul 26, 2013
who="June VanDerMark"
What the Catholics authorized it to say when they compiled that data in the new testament!
You worship the same words authorized by the Catholics whom you refer to as liars.
Silly fool!
**********

Were that the case, it would be foolish to accept those words as truth.

However, the Catholics have been TAUGHT that their 'founders' authorized the Bible. But IF THAT WERE TRUE, the Bible would contain their teachings, and nothing in it would oppose their teachings.

KayMarie

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#466000 Jul 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
The ones who do not do this will be judged 'guilty' of a lack of love.
KayMarie
You indicate that you alone know the "MIND-SET" of the one and only GOD.

You are one of millions and millions of others who also perceived their selves as WISE men.

Arrogant fool!

“"None shall pass"”

Since: Jul 11

There

#466001 Jul 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
If a god loves you (a Protestant) and disowns Catholics, he is one messed up ex-Jewish god!
:)
God talking to his self ... "Well, let's see now ... I first committed to love only the Jews ... but then the Catholics talked me into loving only them. But now KayMarie is even more persuasive than were those Catholics, so I guess I will flatter KayMarie as being the special one of the day. I wish they would all leave me alone to love who I want to love."
:)
This is the grave of Nicky Dee
Who died defending his Deity
His belief was true, his faith was strong
But he's just as dead as if he was wrong.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#466002 Jul 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
The conscience of the born again is troubled by the need of others, and they will 'feed the hungry','cloth the naked', etc.
You honestly believe that you were called by a god to guide us on a righteous path.

You poor misguided mortal human-animal!

I believe that humans are no more important than are all other forms of life.

Religion is BUNK!

“Free gift means FREE”

Since: Jan 09

Chicagoland

#466003 Jul 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Osas7" Has This Passage Ever Bothered You?
Matthew 25:31-46 - Works Salvation?
http://www.faithalone.org/magazine/y1988/88ma...
The Judgment of
Matthew 25:31-46
http://www.faithalone.org/magazine/y2011/11E2...
**********
This is not 'works' salvation. It is...the Bible says...a JUDGMENT.
It judges between those who SAY they are good, and those who obey the gospel.
The conscience of the born again is troubled by the need of others, and they will 'feed the hungry','cloth the naked', etc.
The ones who do not do this will be judged 'guilty' of a lack of love.
KayMarie
So, in your view of Scripture, if one does not feed the hungry, or cloth the naked, they will be judged on whether they will go to heaven or not?

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#466004 Jul 26, 2013
I don't feed the hungry. I feed me.

I don't clothe the naked. I clothe me.

Observe how the pope and his entourage live, and you will see that the ones who started the Catholic religion by writing words in a new testament, preached words of love, while living lives of over-stuffed hogs.

“Free gift means FREE”

Since: Jan 09

Chicagoland

#466005 Jul 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree! But according to many devout religious believers (who only place high value on their own religions)... Atheists and other religionists have a misguided view of all issues and those in their own specialized religions have a "guided" view of all issues.
The imbalance is evident
For those who want to SEE
Look into the mirror
Self-inspection is the KEY
Just as you believe you are right, on what you just posted here, which means, I don't see the difference between believers and non-believers thinking they are right!

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#466006 Jul 26, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the grave of Nicky Dee
Who died defending his Deity
His belief was true, his faith was strong
But he's just as dead as if he was wrong.
Hahahahahahaha

Good one ... thanks.

This is the smoke from June VanDerMark
Who went up in the sky with one big spark
She cluttered the air with her debris
Now nobody knows where she may be

“Free gift means FREE”

Since: Jan 09

Chicagoland

#466007 Jul 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Osas7" Has This Passage Ever Bothered You?
Matthew 25:31-46 - Works Salvation?
http://www.faithalone.org/magazine/y1988/88ma...
The Judgment of
Matthew 25:31-46
http://www.faithalone.org/magazine/y2011/11E2...
**********
This is not 'works' salvation. It is...the Bible says...a JUDGMENT.
It judges between those who SAY they are good, and those who obey the gospel.
The conscience of the born again is troubled by the need of others, and they will 'feed the hungry','cloth the naked', etc.
The ones who do not do this will be judged 'guilty' of a lack of love.
KayMarie
Also, as a addendum to my last response to you for this post, what separates your view from the Catholic view, which believes "love" is necessary(when they quote Galatians 5:16)? I only ask this question, if this is your view in relation to "salvation".

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#466008 Jul 26, 2013
Osas7 wrote:
<quoted text>So, in your view of Scripture, if one does not feed the hungry, or cloth the naked, they will be judged on whether they will go to heaven or not?
The "matter" is written in KayMarie's head.

Rumor has it that brain-cells are conditioned to follow all commands of their human masters.

There is no free will for those cells.
Human Being

Iowa, LA

#466009 Jul 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
When the brain-cells are all dead, there is NO resuscitation ... period.
If that were not so there would be NO morgues.
June:

That is why I asked the question concerning consciousness.

But I agree with you..., you have no clue about being conscious, whether alive or dead. I accept your not knowing....

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#466010 Jul 26, 2013
Osas7 wrote:
<quoted text>Just as you believe you are right, on what you just posted here, which means, I don't see the difference between believers and non-believers thinking they are right!
Of course I hope I am right ... but I don't try to persuade others that a god believes I am right.

That is the difference.

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
is it wrong i like to wear womens underwear (Nov '12) 13 min i fkedurBeezyanally 279
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 15 min Hidingfromyou 878,149
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 39 min sangili karuppan 7,618
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Darwins Stepchild 177,849
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 1 hr sexy gay 560
google sniper for make money online 2 hr Clesteron 3
9/11&bin 2 hr REV CAROL 1
The Christian Atheist debate 5 hr too lazy to log in 3,794
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 7 hr dollarsbill 7,967
More from around the web