Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 653701 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: Jul 08

Location hidden

#473483 Aug 28, 2013
Mithraism and Christianity II

For Ulansey and others of his generation of scholars, little other than the name of the Persian deity was borrowed for the Roman mysteries. Beck sees more than that, but not to the extent Cumont did at the beginning of the 20th century. In Ulansey's words, there were "a number of serious problems with Cumont's assumption that the Mithraic mysteries derived from ancient Iranian religion. Most significant among these is that there is no parallel in ancient Iran to the iconography which is the primary fact of the Roman Mithraic cult. For example, as already mentioned, by far the most important icon in the Roman cult was the tauroctony. This scene shows Mithras in the act of killing a bull, accompanied by a dog, a snake, a raven, and a scorpion; the scene is depicted as taking place inside a cave like the mithraeum itself. This icon was located in the most important place in every mithraeum, and therefore must have been an expression of the central myth of the Roman cult. Thus, if the god Mithras of the Roman religion was actually the Iranian god Mithra, we should expect to find in Iranian mythology a story in which Mithra kills a bull. However, the fact is that no such Iranian myth exists: in no known Iranian text does Mithra have anything to do with killing a bull."6

Assuming any parallels between Christianity and Mithraism requires syncretism only on Christianity’s part is naïve. As Cumont notes, "The only domain in which we can ascertain in detail the extent to which Christianity imitated Mithraism is that of art. The Mithraic sculpture, which had been first developed, furnished the ancient Christian marble-cutters with a large number of models, which they adopted or adapted…"7 Cumont goes further: "We are too imperfectly acquainted with the dogmas and liturgies of the [Mithraic Mysteries], as well as with the development of primitive Christianity, to say definitely what mutual influences were operative in their simultaneous evolution. But be this as it may, resemblances do not necessarily suppose an imitation. Many correspondences between the Mithraic doctrine and the Catholic faith are explicable by their common Oriental origin. Nevertheless, certain ideas and certain ceremonies must necessarily have passed from the one cult to the other; but in the majority of cases we rather suspect this transference than clearly perceive it."8

In short, these religions arose at approximately the same time, likely borrowed from one another as well as inherited common themes and assimilated common cultural motifs of the time. But which borrowed from which and what themes were borrowed vs. inherited or assimilated from other influences is simply not knowable in the main. In this regard, I’d recommend a reading of Drudgery Divine by Jonathan Z. Smith of the University of Chicago. So would Beck.

6. Ulansey, David, http://www.mysterium.com/mithras.html .
7. Cumont, Franz V.M., McCormack, Thomas J., ed., The Mysteries of Mithra (Open Court Publications, 1903), p. 196.
8. Ibid., p. 194.
truth

Australia

#473484 Aug 28, 2013
deceiver is deceiver

on Cross is pure and clear INRI
where is that your letters there..

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#473485 Aug 28, 2013
Mithraism and Christianity III

And as to common inheritance, the December 25th celebration in both religions may simply be usurping the Roman celebration for Sol Invictus rather than one religion necessarily borrowing that date from the other. There is no such date in the Iranian tradition for Mithra that I am aware of, nor is there one in the Christian scriptures, only in later tradition. With respect to the Christian practice, Cumont claims that “it appears certain that the commemoration of the Nativity was set for the 25th of December, because it was at the winter solstice that the rebirth of the invincible god, the Natalis Invictus, was celebrated.”9

Often on the Internet one sees references to "wise men" coming to Mithra's birth bearing gifts,but I have never found evidence of that. His birth is sometimes shown in art being attended by three shepherds, but not magi, and no gifts are involved that I’ve ever discovered. This likely is a misinterpretation of 4th century Christian art that sometimes depicted three Mithraic priests attending Jesus’s nativity. That is, by the fourth century, the magi of Matthew sometimes were depicted in some Christian art as Mithraic priests. I assume this was intended as a thumb in the eye for Christianity's main rival at the time, but it also makes some sense. Since the Mithraic mysteries relied heavily on astrology, and since "magi" is the Greek plural for magician, a term that included astrologers, why not portray these astrologers as Mithraic priests? Why not portray your rivals worshiping your deity at his birth given Matthew’s story of magi attending the birth and Mithraism’s link to the Zodiac?

Likewise with the common claim Mithras was born of a virgin. Mithras emerged from a rock10 without the help of a virgin, at least in mainstream Mithraism. I can find no reference in Cumont, Beck, or Ulansey that supports this claim or the common claim of crucifixion or decent into hell by Mithras.
What’s the upshot of all this? Mithraism and Christianity have much in common, just not as much as is commonly claimed with respect to their “saviors”. The shared traits between the two religions makes great since these religions developed in the same time and culture and both were offshoots of other, older oriental religions. But trying to trace the precise source of those influences can be drudgery divine.11

8. Ibid., p. 194.
9. Cumont, Franz V.M., Mithraism and the religions of the Empire, in Open Court (v. 16, n. 12, December 1902) pp. 717- 32 at p. 726.
10. Tripolitis, Antonia, Religions of the Hellenistic-Roman Age (Eerdmans, 2002), p. 50.
10. Smith, Jonathan Z., Drudgery Divine,(University of Chicago Press, 2002).

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#473486 Aug 28, 2013
Footnote 10. Smith... = 11. Smith...
Chess Jurist

Columbus, OH

#473487 Aug 28, 2013
makes great since = makes great sense since
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#473488 Aug 28, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
I have been staying away from Topix. It is best for me right now.It upset me that the Catholics would give into evil so deeply that they would come under an Orthodox name to try to spread the falsehoods about Orthodoxy that they could not spread under their own name.
ICXC NIKA appeared when I kept shooting down Anthony's and Clay's false remarks about Orthodoxy with facts and true history.That is he appeared in Topix. That's when he suddenly appeared in this particular forum after years of just 2 Orthodox here. The Catholics know also that the name I used to use here was ICXC so they used this name deliberately.
The Catholic cant counter my arguments. They think that however you would believe another Orthodox. So they use ICXC NIKA to promote their falsehoods. Believe me,they are giving superficial info re Orthodoxy and spinning it their way. Remember the Evil One uses some Truth and twists it to accomplish his ends.
I know that you trust and believe me.You know that I also respect you.You are well familiar with how the Catholics use falsehoods and lies to demean your faith as not real.
Please do not respond to ICXC NIKA> Its your choice though.
What a load of malarkey Nick. Clearly ICXC NIKA was not a Catholic. I believe he was a member of the Oriental Orthodox Christian community, probably a cleric. He explained aspects of Orthodoxy very pecisely and unambiguously without shame or fear of offending the protestants here, unlike you. He didn't back down from you and your wife when you attacked and accused him of plagiarism, etc. Now you come back with absurd accusations and innuendo. It's sad to see how low you will go. I think you need some real spiritual direction from your priest (assuming he's not on the same paranoid page as you are).
Clay

Melrose Park, IL

#473489 Aug 28, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
CONTINUED
SALVATION DEFINED IN GREEK...IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
G629
ἀπ ολυ ́τρ ωσι ς
apolutrōsis
ap-ol-oo'-tro-sis
From a compound of G575 and G3083; (the act) ransom in full, that is,(figuratively) riddance, or (specifically) Christian salvation:- deliverance, redemption.
G4991
σωτ ηρι ́α
sōtēria
so-tay-ree'-ah
Feminine of a derivative of G4990 as (properly abstract) noun; rescue or safety (physically or morally):- deliver, health, salvation, save, saving.
G4992
σωτ ήρ ιον
sōtērion
so-tay'-ree-on
Neuter of the same as G4991 as (properly concrete) noun; defender or (by implication) defence:- salvation.
COMMENTARY BY F.B. MEYER
Romans 8:31-39
No Separation from Christ’s Love
Rom_8:31-39
This is the close of the Apostle’s argument. He has shown that believers are dear to God because they are in Christ; that their every need has been anticipated and provided for; that their guilt has been canceled and provision made for their holy and victorious character; that the Holy Spirit is in them and with them forever; that sin is under their feet and heaven over their heads-
what, then, have they to fear?
are you saying you're ok with Joel Osteen selling his 2 million dollar house and purchasing a 10 million dollar house.... and that's ok with God?
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#473490 Aug 28, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>Not an Ecumenical Council. Check on the web everyone.It is well know that the Orthodox believe in consubstantiation.Just look up the word on the Net.Goodbye
I've googled "orthodox church consubstantiation", very little, if anything definitive comes up. It's tragic that you'll go so far as to deny your own faith in order to avoid any association with Catholic beliefs. You're a hater Nick. You need spiritual help.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#473491 Aug 28, 2013
Seraphima wrote:
now pay attention folks....negative judges are being changed to positive ones and positive ones to negative...LOL..priceless!!
"Yeah, it goes like this, here it goes
Paranoia, the destroyer
Here's to paranoia
Paranoia, the destroyer
Hey hey, here it goes
Paranoia, the destroyer
And it goes like this
Paranoia, the destroyer
And it goes like this"

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#473492 Aug 28, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:

No need - I'm still trying to grasp how you and all of Christianity can accept limiting "God's inspiration".
When you can answer that, then you will have something to discuss.
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
And according to you ... YOU KNOW all ABOUT inspiration from "god" while others are too dumb to allow you to be their leader.
How funny!
Another non-answer June?

a. If there is a "God", I believe "He" would not be limited in inspiring individuals - because it is a "personal relationship with God".

b. I don't have any control over others, please stop implying that I am some sort of "powerful being".

Why do you continue to express how much you really don't know about people.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#473493 Aug 28, 2013
Just Sayin wrote:

If God were to reveal Himself to you in all His entirety (not veiling HImself in any way) and tell you everything He knows and everything about Himself, do you think you could understand it all and retain it all?

New Age wrote:
I'm smart - yes. In the least, I rcvd directly what "God" wants to do - and not thorugh some unknown author.

Why?
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Hahahahahaha
I suggest that your over-dosing on Gnosticism has infected your brain-cells with nonsensical debris.
That is your problem June, you love to take other's statements out of context. You should try to correct that, it will help in your understanding religion, much better.

My response was hypothetical, just like the question asked of me.

Please try to stay focused.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#473494 Aug 28, 2013
June - you don't want me to send you to the children's table, do you?

:o)
Clay

Melrose Park, IL

#473495 Aug 28, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
~~~~
YOU WROTE
Joel Osteen privately interprets scripture too. He thinks God wishes prosperity upon him and his family.
YOU ARE THE ONE THAT IS IGNORANT
AS ARE
so are many others that believe GOD WANTS YOU TO LIVE IN ABJECT POVERTY.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE NEVER DEFINED -->SALVATION<--
FROM A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE.
THEY ARE IGNORANT OF WHAT SALVATION INCLUDES...
THEREFOR IT NEVER BECOMES THEIR CONFIDENT EXPECTATIONS...
The Psalmist David wrote..
Psa_68:19 Blessed be the Lord,
who daily loadeth us with benefits, even the God of our salvation. Selah.
AND AGAIN
Psa_103:2 Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits:
THE BENEFITS OF SALVATION/JESUS...
DEFINED IN HEBREW...
NOTE THAT
Fundamental Christians are notorious for using one verse to cancel out others, provided it 'better fits the Christianity' they desire.

"sell everything you have and follow me"

My Aux Bishop, Bishop Piche of the Minneapolis/Saint Paul, lives in a cramped studio apartment with little amenities.

Pope Francis lives in a similar apartment.

By virtue of their order, they make a vow of poverty. That doesn't mean they don't eat well and travel by modern means. But they do not own stocks, bonds and other assets.
I know of no Catholic Priest who lives lavishly.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#473496 Aug 28, 2013
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>Hermi. when you decided to leave for awhile, it(ICXC NIKA) left too. all of us knew this was just a ploy of a catholic on here to try and discredit you, and therefore we Chrisitans on here paid it no mind.
we KNOW the difference between a original(you and your wife) and a phony like some of these people on here are.
we will continue to ask the Lord for your Healing
He was no Catholic. He was a very charitable individual, an Egyptian living in Canada I believe, explaining Orthodoxy, most likely Oriental Orthodoxy, in a clear and precise manner, with love and charity. He wasn't ashamed of it, had no need to kowtow to fundamentalist evangelicals. Sure is easy for you guys to bad mouth him now that he's gone...you're so brave.

Since: Sep 09

Surrey, Canada

#473497 Aug 28, 2013
Religion - A Delusion wrote:
<quoted text>
This poster implies the catholic faith has been so Jesus-like when it came to the treatment of their Jewish brothers.
Which is why Hitler copied the actions of a former Pope - ghettos and forced to wear symbols.
(This poster further reveals the delusion.)
I just posted this on the other thread.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>

Dead characters can't talk ... so it is no mystery that the theologians in varying religions told stories of saviors that came and were crucified by those who were disenchanted BY the "warnings" of the saviors that hell or hells would be their lot if they didn't follow. And in the stories (compiled BY the theologians) the saviors promised to come again to save ONLY the GOOD and HOLY ones that put complete faith in the saviors.

So it followed that all the followers of the words written by those theologians were held in bondage of fear of burning in hells or landing in freezing hells if they lost faith that their saviors were indeed coming again.

As you are aware, none of those promised saviors ever came back to earth ... simply because they never came the first time, as the stories were all tales created by theologians.

The Jews in the era of Catholicism claimed that Jesus was not the real messiah. Of course he wasn't!!! Jesus was created by Catholic theologians in ORDER to save only those who became Catholic.

The faithful Jews are still waiting for their savior to come the FIRST time.

Religion is a HOAX that was created by theologians.

You will see when you choose to see.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#473498 Aug 28, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
What a load of malarkey Nick. Clearly ICXC NIKA was not a Catholic. I believe he was a member of the Oriental Orthodox Christian community, probably a cleric. He explained aspects of Orthodoxy very pecisely and unambiguously without shame or fear of offending the protestants here, unlike you. He didn't back down from you and your wife when you attacked and accused him of plagiarism, etc. Now you come back with absurd accusations and innuendo. It's sad to see how low you will go. I think you need some real spiritual direction from your priest (assuming he's not on the same paranoid page as you are).
Remember who you have to answer to. Enough said.

Since: Sep 09

Surrey, Canada

#473499 Aug 28, 2013
Christians blab and blab and blab warnings that if others don't believe in Jesus the way they believe ... the others will end up in hell.

You refuse to see that you are comparable to trained monkeys.

If the theologians had taught that only bliss in afterlives awaits all humans ... there would BE no religion.

That teaching of hell and the fear it "brings to mind" is what keeps you preaching AT others.

Theologians were crafty ... and for following their words ... YOU are dumb as bags of hammers!

There is NO question about THAT issue!

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#473500 Aug 28, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
Christians blab and blab and blab warnings that if others don't believe in Jesus the way they believe ... the others will end up in hell.
You refuse to see that you are comparable to trained monkeys.
If the theologians had taught that only bliss in afterlives awaits all humans ... there would BE no religion.
That teaching of hell and the fear it "brings to mind" is what keeps you preaching AT others.
Theologians were crafty ... and for following their words ... YOU are dumb as bags of hammers!
There is NO question about THAT issue!
I have a question.

Why would anyone put hammers in a bag?

Since: Sep 09

Surrey, Canada

#473501 Aug 28, 2013
Some Jews tried to claim that Elohim was the REAL name of the one and only god and Jehovah was his savior son.

That teaching by Jewish theologians was probably in hopes that the Jesus-myth would lose power in the minds of followers and they would adhere to the dogma that the Jews had salvation all wrapped up before the Catholic theologians LIED about Jesus being the real savior.

Theologians were crafty operators with their pens always at the ready. You will see their lies ... but only when you choose to see.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

From the book “Smith’s Bible Dictionary

God (good). Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures two chief names are used for the one true divine being—ELOHIM, commonly translated God in our version, and JEHOVAH translated Lord.

Since: Sep 09

Surrey, Canada

#473502 Aug 28, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>Remember who you have to answer to. Enough said.
I believed I have to answer to my own conscience ... not to the fear-filled threats of YOUR favorite theologian.

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
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 19 min thetruth 9,362
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 44 min Steve III 45,229
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 55 min Steve III 618,754
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Thinking 63,446
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr DebraE 106,479
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr karl44 973,685
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 2 hr ImFree2Choose 2,569
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 9 hr Pegasus 281,841
More from around the web