Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 665601 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

#474038 Aug 30, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
What occurred to you spiritually that caused the healing? Please be specific.
And please do not use the would "I" or any affiliation to yourself when responding.
You may recall my saying that the human intellect is not expansive enough to capture the spiritual.To define specifically what happened spiritually would would be presumptive and kind of arrogant of me.

This is often my problem when those of various denominations who try to delineate what exactly happens to us when we die,etc.Catholicism has lost its purity by its intellectual speculation and " doctrinal development".

Orthodox somewhat but. always has been satisfied saying we are not God, its a mystery.

For me to presume to tell you what happened spiritually, I would have to try to use reason, logic and science. These are fairly useful instruments for the physical world but not the spiritual.
I have read philosophy.Philosophy falls short in any attempt to prove or disprove God.

How do I know Christ healed me? We know God through union with God-relationship.It is another faculty to use other than conceptually finding our way to God. Very learned me have written on this in the Orthodox faith.There is a theological basis that has been developed over 2000 years.

BUT,the most educated could not get it and the least educated can, It is called humility, surrender, FAITH.

I have always enjoyed my dialogues with you.This one as well. I know you disagree.

OldJG

Rockford, IL

#474039 Aug 30, 2013
StarC wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry O 7, you are wrong on this one…..
“Christ did not say, "Sit down and write Bibles and scatter them over the earth, and let every man read his Bible and judge for himself." If Christ had said that, there would never have been a Christianity on the earth at all, but a Babylon and confusion instead, and never one Church, the union of one body. Hence, Christ never said to His Apostles, "Go and write Bibles and distribute them, and let everyone judge for himself." That injunction was reserved for the Sixteenth Century, and we have seen the result of it. Ever since the Sixteenth Century there have been springing up religion upon religion, and churches upon churches, all fighting and quarreling with one another, and all because of the private interpretation of the Bible.
Christ sent His Apostles with authority to teach all nations, and never gave them any
command of writing the Bible. And the Apostles went forth and preached everywhere,
and planted the Church of God throughout the earth, but never thought of writing.“
And one more thing, NOT EVERYTHING IS IN HOLY SCRIPTURE.
We read in
John 21:24-25
"24
It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true.
25
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written."
This is why we have Traditions! We believe in BOTH, written and oral Traditions.
You said, quote, "And one more thing, NOT EVERYTHING IS IN HOLY SCRIPTURE.
We read in
John 21:24-25, 24 "This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. 25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written." End quote.(ESV)

Really? Why just the other day I was looking for a recipe for pot roast and to my amazement when I looked in the Bible I could not find it. Wow StarC, you are right. Not everything is in the Bible. Duh.....

The Bible was written and contains everything a man, woman, boy or girl would need to know and believe to be saved. That is why the Bible was written. Do you understand?

You said, quote, "This is why we have Traditions! We believe in BOTH, written and oral Traditions." End quote.

No, actually the Roman Catholic church believes in oral tradition so they can re-create the Gospel to fit their theology. Oral tradition is much like a verbal contract. Is it fair to say most people purchase their home by a verbal contract or do they purchase their home by a written contract? If you purchased your home with funds from a lending institution you did so by written contract. Why was your contract with the lending institution written and not oral? Could it be oral contracts are based on how the contract is remembered by each party whereas written is proof of how the contract truly was established between the parties. Black print on white paper. Not guess work by recollection.

Finally, in the Bible Jesus says many times, "it is written". Jesus uses the written word of God as proof positive to defend His position not oral remarks from a third party. Can you provide proof of any kind, from anyplace or anyone that would suggest Jesus ever said, "it is tradition". Did Jesus give tradition the same validity and authority He gave the written word of God? If not, why not?
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#474040 Aug 30, 2013
What does the word "hope" define in a Biblical context? All are welcome to answer.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#474041 Aug 30, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't know any answers, why are you promoting your special brand of Gnosticism as though it is of high value?
I don't promote Gnosticism.

I promote the utilization of teachings by Jesus.

Men had labeled them as "Gnostic", not "God".

I consider them words written by a man, who heard them from another man.

You place too much importance on the words and labels men have applied to the texts.

Move past the words and understand their meanings.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#474042 Aug 30, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
If we follow your gnostic "truth" where will you lead us?
Will it be to a home with one god of enlightenment that matches up with your enlightenment?
:)
I'm not asking you to follow anythgin I state.

That would have to be a decision YOU make.

Self.

I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to understand.

Oh wait, I know. You had been part of a religious organization that required you to believe aa certain way, you now have to ask if it is okay to believe differently, or you will get in some sort of trouble.

Is that the reason?

:o)

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#474043 Aug 30, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't know any answers, why are you promoting your special brand of Gnosticism as though it is of high value?
I guess the same reasons why you promote separation of physical and the spiritual - because it is what you believe, and you have a freedom established that allows you to speak the way you do.

I'm just as special as you are.

Don't be disappointed, be happy for me.
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#474044 Aug 30, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow Chuck, that's sincere of you.
Believe me, if parts of Revelation can not be safely interpreted, then its best to leave it alone rather than face the warning from John, about adding to the Prophecies of his Book.
Now you may call me a clown.
Don't get me wrong Clay, God will destroy your church. I'm just not convinced the catholic church is in Rev 17.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#474045 Aug 30, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
What occurred to you spiritually that caused the healing? Please be specific.
And please do not use the would "I" or any affiliation to yourself when responding.
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>You may recall my saying that the human intellect is not expansive enough to capture the spiritual.To define specifically what happened spiritually would would be presumptive and kind of arrogant of me.
This is often my problem when those of various denominations who try to delineate what exactly happens to us when we die,etc.Catholicism has lost its purity by its intellectual speculation and " doctrinal development".
Orthodox somewhat but. always has been satisfied saying we are not God, its a mystery.
For me to presume to tell you what happened spiritually, I would have to try to use reason, logic and science. These are fairly useful instruments for the physical world but not the spiritual.
I have read philosophy.Philosophy falls short in any attempt to prove or disprove God.
How do I know Christ healed me? We know God through union with God-relationship.It is another faculty to use other than conceptually finding our way to God. Very learned me have written on this in the Orthodox faith.There is a theological basis that has been developed over 2000 years.
BUT,the most educated could not get it and the least educated can, It is called humility, surrender, FAITH.
I have always enjoyed my dialogues with you.This one as well. I know you disagree.
"To define specifically what happened spiritually would would be presumptive and kind of arrogant of me."
- but yet you convey that "Jesus cured me", and went onto tell me how there is a separate spiritual "healing process" that is not of the physical.

So - with you making this statement, you make the claim you know you were indeed healed spiritually. But when I question it with you, you reverse your stance and say that you don't know.

Hmmmm.....Herme - you are contradicting your own statements.

"For me to presume to tell you what happened spiritually, I would have to try to use reason, logic and science. "
- or you could be honest and state, "Yes, after 2 yrs of searching for a diagnosis, and rcvg it from a rheumatologist, Science finally discovered my ailment and now I am on the road to recovery."

But instead, you chose to claim "Jesus healed me", when you plainly don't know that he did - you only want to "believe" that is the case, because you heard that people were praying for your.
- and I disagree, praying doesn't work. If it did, anyone on this forum - all welcome to participate in a prayer experiment with me - have all refused to do so.

"How do I know Christ healed me? We know God through union with God-relationship.It is another faculty to use other than conceptually finding our way to God. Very learned me have written on this in the Orthodox faith.There is a theological basis that has been developed over 2000 years."
- This is just a belief you have created within your own mind. An opinion formulated by men. But nothing in the form of "how you were healed by Jesus, how Jesus approached your spiritual mind to heal you through that mechanism, or any evidence to show Jesus appearing to you, applying his healing hands upon you, and then curing you.

To be honest, I believe that you now take certain medication to help with this ailment.

Did you get those from Jesus too?

:o)

As you can see Herme, there are some finer points to belief that MANY peopl just don't acknowledge, because it does affect their "faith". Honesty shows that they haven't been completely truthful - with even themselves.

Good post sir - thanks for responding.
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#474046 Aug 30, 2013
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
<>
No, actually the Roman Catholic church believes in oral tradition so they can re-create the Gospel to fit their theology. Oral tradition is much like a verbal contract. Is it fair to say most people purchase their home by a verbal contract or do they purchase their home by a written contract? If you purchased your home with funds from a lending institution you did so by written contract. Why was your contract with the lending institution written and not oral? Could it be oral contracts are based on how the contract is remembered by each party whereas written is proof of how the contract truly was established between the parties. Black print on white paper. Not guess work by recollection.
Finally, in the Bible Jesus says many times, "it is written". Jesus uses the written word of God as proof positive to defend His position not oral remarks from a third party. Can you provide proof of any kind, from anyplace or anyone that would suggest Jesus ever said, "it is tradition". Did Jesus give tradition the same validity and authority He gave the written word of God? If not, why not?
"Is it fair to say most people purchase their home by a verbal contract or do they purchase their home by a written contract?"

The word was preached verbally for over 10 years before a single letter of the NT was penned.

"Why was your contract with the lending institution written and not oral?"

Jesus is the Word. Jesus preached...orally..., He didn't hand out bibles/contracts.

"Not guess work by recollection."

Again, 10 years before a single letter of the NT. And the gospels were written about 30 years later. The gospel was preached orally. No guess work involved.

"Did Jesus give tradition the same validity and authority He gave the written word of God?"

Yes. Hanukkah isn't mentioned in the Hebrew bible, but Jesus celebrated it nonetheless, it was Jewish Tradition.
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#474047 Aug 30, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't get me wrong Clay, God will destroy your church. I'm just not convinced the catholic church is in Rev 17.
Where does the bible say that?
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#474048 Aug 30, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Where does the bible say that?
When it talks about world religious systems.. Want a book , chapter , and verse again?
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#474049 Aug 30, 2013
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
<>
No, actually the Roman Catholic church believes in oral tradition so they can re-create the Gospel to fit their theology. Oral tradition is much like a verbal contract. Is it fair to say most people purchase their home by a verbal contract or do they purchase their home by a written contract? If you purchased your home with funds from a lending institution you did so by written contract. Why was your contract with the lending institution written and not oral? Could it be oral contracts are based on how the contract is remembered by each party whereas written is proof of how the contract truly was established between the parties. Black print on white paper. Not guess work by recollection.
Finally, in the Bible Jesus says many times, "it is written". Jesus uses the written word of God as proof positive to defend His position not oral remarks from a third party. Can you provide proof of any kind, from anyplace or anyone that would suggest Jesus ever said, "it is tradition". Did Jesus give tradition the same validity and authority He gave the written word of God? If not, why not?
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
"Is it fair to say most people purchase their home by a verbal contract or do they purchase their home by a written contract?"
The word was preached verbally for over 10 years before a single letter of the NT was penned.
"Why was your contract with the lending institution written and not oral?"
Jesus is the Word. Jesus preached...orally..., He didn't hand out bibles/contracts.
"Not guess work by recollection."
Again, 10 years before a single letter of the NT. And the gospels were written about 30 years later. The gospel was preached orally. No guess work involved.
"Did Jesus give tradition the same validity and authority He gave the written word of God?"
Yes. Hanukkah isn't mentioned in the Hebrew bible, but Jesus celebrated it nonetheless, it was Jewish Tradition.
AnthonyMN, thank you for your senseless rantings. Your response is further proof of your Biblical ignorance.

I said, quote "Is it fair to say most people purchase their home by a verbal contract or do they purchase their home by a written contract?" End quote.

Your response, quote, "The word was preached verbally for over 10 years before a single letter of the NT was penned." End quote.

10 years? Can you provide proof of this time frame or is this another "tradition" of the Roman Catholics?

I said, quote, "Why was your contract with the lending institution written and not oral?" End quote.

Your response, quote, "Jesus is the Word. Jesus preached...orally..., He didn't hand out bibles/contracts." End quote.

Really? Thank you. Wow, what a revelation!! Why didn't the Word of God continue from strictly a "oral" basis? Why was it written down?

I said, quote, "Black print on white paper. Not guess work by recollection." End quote.

Your response, quote, "Again, 10 years before a single letter of the NT. And the gospels were written about 30 years later. The gospel was preached orally. No guess work involved." End quote.

Again, why was the Gospel written down and not just "preached orally" for all perpetuity?

I said, quote, "Did Jesus give tradition the same validity and authority He gave the written word of God?" End quote.

Your response, quote, "Yes. Hanukkah isn't mentioned in the Hebrew bible, but Jesus celebrated it nonetheless, it was Jewish Tradition." End quote.

Thank you AnthonyMN. You are living proof.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#474050 Aug 30, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>You may recall my saying that the human intellect is not expansive enough to capture the spiritual.To define specifically what happened spiritually would would be presumptive and kind of arrogant of me.
This is often my problem when those of various denominations who try to delineate what exactly happens to us when we die,etc.Catholicism has lost its purity by its intellectual speculation and " doctrinal development".
Orthodox somewhat but. always has been satisfied saying we are not God, its a mystery.
For me to presume to tell you what happened spiritually, I would have to try to use reason, logic and science. These are fairly useful instruments for the physical world but not the spiritual.
I have read philosophy.Philosophy falls short in any attempt to prove or disprove God.
How do I know Christ healed me? We know God through union with God-relationship.It is another faculty to use other than conceptually finding our way to God. Very learned me have written on this in the Orthodox faith.There is a theological basis that has been developed over 2000 years.
BUT,the most educated could not get it and the least educated can, It is called humility, surrender, FAITH.
I have always enjoyed my dialogues with you.This one as well. I know you disagree.
I understand.

Trying to NOT USE "I" or "me" in any explanation of something "spiritual" is really quite hard to do. I sure can't do it.

You shouldn't either.

Otherwise, if you really dig deep into a statement like that, the answer still falls back on "you" and nothing spiritual at all.

Again, this is the honesty people refuse to accept as truth.

Sheez - Jesus even promoted it heavily, yet so-called "Christians" still rebuke it.

Honesty, Herme. Not too hard to admit, but many people have a hard time doing so.

Why? Because they know it destroys their belief and are afraid to admit it does. They would rather lean on someone else. Shoot, it takes the blame off of themself - that is the beauty of it.

That is like me saying, "Jesus cured me of all my doubts with Christianity. He showed me the right path to righteousness, and it wasn't through the Bible."

Prove He didn't.

See, that is how simple people can lie to others.

It all begins and ends with you.
Dr shrink

Baltimore, MD

#474051 Aug 30, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand.
Trying to NOT USE "I" or "me" in any explanation of something "spiritual" is really quite hard to do. I sure can't do it.
You shouldn't either.
Otherwise, if you really dig deep into a statement like that, the answer still falls back on "you" and nothing spiritual at all.
Again, this is the honesty people refuse to accept as truth.
Sheez - Jesus even promoted it heavily, yet so-called "Christians" still rebuke it.
Honesty, Herme. Not too hard to admit, but many people have a hard time doing so.
Why? Because they know it destroys their belief and are afraid to admit it does. They would rather lean on someone else. Shoot, it takes the blame off of themself - that is the beauty of it.
That is like me saying, "Jesus cured me of all my doubts with Christianity. He showed me the right path to righteousness, and it wasn't through the Bible."
Prove He didn't.
See, that is how simple people can lie to others.
It all begins and ends with you.
mister BO
now you found right most wicked christianty topic,where everyone can feed your troll abominable wicked rants against Bible,and true believers
good luck spiritual POS

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#474052 Aug 30, 2013
Dr shrink wrote:
<quoted text>
mister BO
now you found right most wicked christianty topic,where everyone can feed your troll abominable wicked rants against Bible,and true believers
good luck spiritual POS
Please go stalk someone else.

You insults are very problematic for me to even think you consider yourself a so-called "Christian", if you can't even post a response without insults, name calling or other "un-Christian" words.

You really do need to research the term "Christian" and find out how it DOESN"T apply to you in any stretch of the word.

Good luck.
Clay

Minneapolis, MN

#474053 Aug 30, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't get me wrong Clay, God will destroy your church. I'm just not convinced the catholic church is in Rev 17.
Lol. I thank the Lord I'm not a fanatic.
Clay

Minneapolis, MN

#474054 Aug 30, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
When it talks about world religious systems.. Want a book , chapter , and verse again?
You haven't even broke the surface of the Bible. The deeper you go, Catholicism is revealed.
In fact, if the fundies would realize for once, how the Bible came to fruition, it would be impossible to avoid how the authority of the Church compiled it.
That's a huge problem for Evangelicals. The Catholic Church gave us the Bible. It ain't yours Chucky. You have no right telling anyone what sacred scripture says.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#474055 Aug 30, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
It's been a Church (Jesus Christs One True Apostolic Catholic Church) for over 2000 years....... Your "ridiculous nonsensical editorialized opinions of (rif-raf) have "ZERO" credibility, with ANY of us Catholics on this forum, including the 1.4 billion Catholics around the world who "know the TRUTH"!!! Go tell your "fictitious nonsense" to the National Inquirer! They "thrive" on printing lies that distort the TRUTH!!
It never was a Church...it is not a Church...it never will be a Church...Christians know it is not a Church...it is a denomination...plus it cannot be Holy in that it is run by the Pedophile Cadre...

Your father is well pleased with you labeling the Truth in the English dictionary, the Sacred Word of God, the Catholic encyclopeepee, the SBC teaching, as ridiculous nonsensical editorialized opinions of (rif-raf) "fictitious nonsense".

denomnation: A large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy.

The Roman Catholic church is a denomination of the Christian faith. Christ built not any...none...zilich denominations...He built His church.

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

church: ekklesia, 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.

Therefore...any....bar none...Christian congregation or an assembly of, is the church Christ built.

The NABre poop arroved Catlick 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.

Therefore...any....bar none...Christian congregation or an assembly of, is the church Christ built

The SBC teaches:
A New Testament church of the Lord Jesus Christ is an autonomous local congregation of baptized believers, associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the two ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word, and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. Each congregation operates under the Lordship of Christ through democratic processes. In such a congregation each member is responsible and accountable to Christ as Lord. Its scriptural officers are pastors and deacons. While both men and women are gifted for service in the church, the office of pastor is limited to men as qualified by Scripture.

The New Testament speaks also of the church as the Body of Christ which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages, believers from every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.

Therefore...any....bar none...Christian congregation or an assembly of, is the church Christ built

The catlick encyclopdia: church: The term church is the name employed in the Teutonic languages to render the Greek ekklesia (ecclesia), the term by which the New Testament writers denote the society founded by Jesus Christ....

Therefore...any....bar none...Christian congregation or an assembly of, is the church Christ built
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#474056 Aug 30, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
When it talks about world religious systems.. Want a book , chapter , and verse again?
That's as much a stretch as gif saying Revelation applies. Historically the only Church that existed after Jesus ascended is the Catholic Church....or do you have something outside the bible recording the protestant fundamentalist community?
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#474057 Aug 30, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't even broke the surface of the Bible. The deeper you go, Catholicism is revealed.
In fact, if the fundies would realize for once, how the Bible came to fruition, it would be impossible to avoid how the authority of the Church compiled it.
That's a huge problem for Evangelicals. The Catholic Church gave us the Bible. It ain't yours Chucky. You have no right telling anyone what sacred scripture says.
We've been through a hundred times but here goes:
Can't find Mary being sinless
Can't find transubstantiation
Can't find any record of an infant being baptized
Can't find praying the rosary
Can't find any priests in the NT unless you call them Christians as the bible does

*does this break the surface or shall I keep going?

you said six years back as a catholic...you're are just a lost pup.

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) 17 min Joe Fortuna 88,519
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 26 min Insults Are Easier 284,724
Queen Cleopatra was clearly Black. White people... (Aug '10) 33 min gundee123 1,262
Anyone wanna masturbate on FaceTime together (Jan '14) 2 hr Jmr 8
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 2 hr Classic 3,955
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 2 hr X Pendable 184,814
The Future of Politics in America 3 hr It aint necessari... 312
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 hr Unruh 977,504
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 16 hr truth 696
More from around the web