Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 646337 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.

ReginaM

Toms River, NJ

#484829 Oct 25, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I was talking about your statement that the Apostles,DID NOT WRITE .
John ..Peter ...Matthew,..???
Did THEY write ..your,statement was,jumped on ..agreeing that those,scriptures were,written later by CATHOLUC CHURCH .
This is,not good
He did not say they "didn't write"...he said Christ never told them or anyone else to write anything down, and He didn't. The Church was established long before one word of the NT was ever written. The Church came first. The Bible came from the Church, not the other way around.
Liam

Chicago, IL

#484830 Oct 25, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong again Clay...imagine that.
the Greek word "petros" is masculine; "petra" is feminine.
Did Jesus call Simon a Rock or not?

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#484831 Oct 25, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
ROFLMAO
You don;t even know what God is.
negro pleeeezzzee - you can't even get another member to join you in your cult of one!;)
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#484832 Oct 25, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Jesus call Simon a Rock or not?
No

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#484833 Oct 25, 2013
marge wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what he says everyday Jesus did not tell them to write the NT but then he says to read the early 'Fathers' like Jesus did tell them to write but not the Apostles?
And it's,confusing why he,says,this ..putting down scripture ..propping up CC.

But it really give,ammunition to those,who call SCRIPTURES,fiction ..
It demeans,NOT JUST NON CATHOLICS..BUT GODS,WORD..

AND,I'm quite frankly surprised about it ..is,why I keep asking .

It's misleading believers,by worse those unsaved souls,..

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#484834 Oct 25, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
The early Church testifies that St. Matthew wrote the gospel in Aramaic.
then the Greek word for rock is moot, isn't it?lol
ReginaM

Toms River, NJ

#484835 Oct 25, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
And it's,confusing why he,says,this ..putting down scripture ..propping up CC.
But it really give,ammunition to those,who call SCRIPTURES,fiction ..
It demeans,NOT JUST NON CATHOLICS..BUT GODS,WORD..
AND,I'm quite frankly surprised about it ..is,why I keep asking .
It's misleading believers,by worse those unsaved souls,..
He never once "put down scripture". Why do you insist on repeating that when it's false?

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#484836 Oct 25, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of things that you don't.
I've posted many of my beliefs already. Maybe you should go back and read my posts, instead of just reading the ones I post directly to you.
You are lazy are you?
You will have to be more specific if you want me to respond to yuo, especially since my beliefs are irrelevant to this forum.
Maybe you can start a new forum with the title being "What do you believe and why?"
<quoted text>
Again, I've stated plenty.
This one for example:
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gth_pat_rob.htm
For being on this forum as long as you have been, you sure like to play the ignorant card on me, and only me.
Why?
Maybe if you took the time to do research on your own beliefs and how they came about you would better understand me and others and why we post what we do.
"to know yourself is to know the kingdom of God."
Move past the words and understand their meanings.
When I asked you if it was the Gnostic so called Tomas,..deflected .

I do not read,all of everyone's,posts,..I read, and,reply to some .

That link at least gives,me some idea,what you think..

We disagree,..on a,lot
Liam

Chicago, IL

#484838 Oct 25, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
No
Then what did He call Simon? What does the Book of Acts call Simon?
Ask prophet Preston to interpret it for you.

I believe we all know where this is going. I vividly remember this conversation not to long ago. I know you guys are aware of the Greek translations by now. I read that its hard to find one protestant scholar today who'll still argue against the Catholic position on Rock. Of course, they'll continue to argue that future rocks became corrupted so Jesus gave the keys to the born again movement.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#484839 Oct 25, 2013
Although it was written in to law at some point in history that heterosexuals committing anal sex would also be put to death ... I never read of even one case where a heterosexual WAS put to death ... as were homosexuals.

That indicates that the laws were only followed as the heterosexuals in power WANTED them to be followed.

How Con-venient that the king of Jerusalem was Catholic.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>

12th century

1120 – Baldwin II of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, convenes the Council of Nablus to address the vices within the Kingdom. The Council calls for the burning of individuals who perpetually commit sodomy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT ...

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#484840 Oct 25, 2013
"Bless me Father, for I have sinned."

"What sin against God did you commit now my son?"

"Well Father, you know from my last confession how I was concerned about my wife's health. The doctor says that that if she has another baby, she will probably die."

"Yes my son, I am aware that after bearing twelve babies for the church, that she is not well, but what is your sin?"

"Because I don't want to take a chance on my wife dying and leaving me to raise the children on my own, we have started as a form of birth control having anal sex."

"OH MY GOODNESS! We must get down on our hands and knees for this prayer to ask our heavenly Father's forgiveness."

"Yes Father. From now on I will obey God's will and only have sex for procreation."

"Bless you my son."

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#484841 Oct 25, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
The early Church testifies that St. Matthew wrote the gospel in Aramaic.
Was Matthew's Gospel first written in Aramaic or Hebrew?
----------
Full Question
Is there any truth to the claim that Matthew's Gospel was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, not Greek? A Fundamentalist I know, who insists Matthew wrote originally in Greek, argues that there's no evidence in favor of the idea that his Gospel was written first in Aramaic, because there's no extant Aramaic original.
Answer
This peculiar argument against the long-standing belief that Aramaic (or Hebrew) was the language in which Matthew originally composed his Gospel was first raised in the 16th century by the Dutch theologian and patristics scholar Desiderius Erasmus. He reasoned that, since there is no evidence of an Aramaic or Hebrew original of Matthew's Gospel, it is futile to argue that the work originally appeared in Aramaic and was subsequently translated into Greek (as most patristics scholars hold).
This is not really much of an argument. It is an argument from silence and can be used just as effectively against the idea that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Greek, since there are likewise no extant originals of the Gospel in Greek. After all, the earliest manuscripts we have of any of the books of the New Testament are in Greek, yet not a single manuscript is an original. They're all copies. From the mere fact of Greek manuscripts we can't conclude that the originals must have been written in Greek yes, there may be a presumption of that, but not actually a proof.
Your Fundamentalist friend is wrong to assert there is no evidence to support the idea of an Aramaic original. In fact, the evidence is quite to the contrary. Since we have no autographs of this or any other New Testament book, it's wise to look at what the early Church had to say on the subject. Catholic apologists, theologians, and Scripture scholars of the second through fifth centuries provide us with a wealth of information on this subject.
Around 180 Irenaeus of Lyons wrote that
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.(Against Heresies 3:1:1)
Fifty years earlier Papias, bishop of Hieropolis in Asia Minor, wrote, "Matthew compiled the sayings [of the Lord] in the Aramaic language, and everyone translated them as well as he could" (Explanation of the Sayings of the Lord [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 3:39]).
Sometime after 244 the Scripture scholar Origen wrote, "Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language" (Commentaries on Matthew [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 6:25]).
----------
Answered by: Catholic Answers Staff
SINCE THIS ANSWER CAME FROM THE CATHOLICS,IT HAS NO FOUNDATION TO BE NON PARTISAN. TAKE IT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT AS MATTHEW, A LEARNED MAN COULD HAVE EASILY WRTTEN IT IN GREEK SINCE THAT WAS A COMMON WORLD WIDE LANGUAGE

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#484843 Oct 25, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
No
None so blind as he who refuses to see.

Unless the Holy Spirit speaks to clay, he will remain in darkness

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#484844 Oct 25, 2013
I suggest that Jesus knew ahead of time that his Jewish father was sending him to earth to be murdered, and Jesus said to himself ... "I'll become a Catholic, and that will teach the old bugger not to mess with ME!"

:)

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#484845 Oct 25, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what did He call Simon? What does the Book of Acts call Simon?
Ask prophet Preston to interpret it for you.
I believe we all know where this is going. I vividly remember this conversation not to long ago. I know you guys are aware of the Greek translations by now. I read that its hard to find one protestant scholar today who'll still argue against the Catholic position on Rock. Of course, they'll continue to argue that future rocks became corrupted so Jesus gave the keys to the born again movement.
Simon[Peter} and Simon bar Jonah.

and one time, Jesus called him satan, and no doubt, once he called Peter for supper.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#484846 Oct 25, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
Although it was written in to law at some point in history that heterosexuals committing anal sex would also be put to death ... I never read of even one case where a heterosexual WAS put to death ... as were homosexuals.
That indicates that the laws were only followed as the heterosexuals in power WANTED them to be followed.
How Con-venient that the king of Jerusalem was Catholic.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>
12th century
1120 – Baldwin II of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, convenes the Council of Nablus to address the vices within the Kingdom. The Council calls for the burning of individuals who perpetually commit sodomy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT ...
Glad you are,well..Believe it or not some of us,were,concerned ..
Obviously you were posting elsewhere ..

I love the,nano badge ..wish mine would,show,
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#484847 Oct 25, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what did He call Simon? What does the Book of Acts call Simon?
Ask prophet Preston to interpret it for you.
I believe we all know where this is going. I vividly remember this conversation not to long ago. I know you guys are aware of the Greek translations by now. I read that its hard to find one protestant scholar today who'll still argue against the Catholic position on Rock. Of course, they'll continue to argue that future rocks became corrupted so Jesus gave the keys to the born again movement.
Christ is talking about Peter's confession.."you are the Son of the living God". He is going to build His church on Peter's confession. The foundation of the church is Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God.

And all Christians have the "keys" Clay. We can share the Gospel and invite folks into the Kingdom.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#484848 Oct 25, 2013
ReginaM wrote:
<quoted text>
He did not say they "didn't write"...he said Christ never told them or anyone else to write anything down, and He didn't. The Church was established long before one word of the NT was ever written. The Church came first. The Bible came from the Church, not the other way around.
well yes He did He told John to write Revelation and we all believe this verse don't we; >All scripture is given by inspiration of God<, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:,

Regina you make it sound like the Bible is not he Word of God and if Faith come by hearing the Word then the Word had to be first.
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#484850 Oct 25, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Jesus call Simon a Rock or not?
If Christ built the church on Peter, then why did Christ say to him, "Get thee behind Me, Satan?" The point is, if you speak the Word of God, I'll build My church on you. If you speak the word of Satan, you're in My way...you're a stumbling block, not a foundation stone. Foundation is true and revelation.

If you speak the words of satan, then you are a stumbling block. No way Peter can be the foundation. The foundation is truth.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#484851 Oct 25, 2013
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>
Was Matthew's Gospel first written in Aramaic or Hebrew?
----------
Full Question
Is there any truth to the claim that Matthew's Gospel was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, not Greek? A Fundamentalist I know, who insists Matthew wrote originally in Greek, argues that there's no evidence in favor of the idea that his Gospel was written first in Aramaic, because there's no extant Aramaic original.
Answer
This peculiar argument against the long-standing belief that Aramaic (or Hebrew) was the language in which Matthew originally composed his Gospel was first raised in the 16th century by the Dutch theologian and patristics scholar Desiderius Erasmus. He reasoned that, since there is no evidence of an Aramaic or Hebrew original of Matthew's Gospel, it is futile to argue that the work originally appeared in Aramaic and was subsequently translated into Greek (as most patristics scholars hold).
This is not really much of an argument. It is an argument from silence and can be used just as effectively against the idea that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Greek, since there are likewise no extant originals of the Gospel in Greek. After all, the earliest manuscripts we have of any of the books of the New Testament are in Greek, yet not a single manuscript is an original. They're all copies. From the mere fact of Greek manuscripts we can't conclude that the originals must have been written in Greek yes, there may be a presumption of that, but not actually a proof.
Your Fundamentalist friend is wrong to assert there is no evidence to support the idea of an Aramaic original. In fact, the evidence is quite to the contrary. Since we have no autographs of this or any other New Testament book, it's wise to look at what the early Church had to say on the subject. Catholic apologists, theologians, and Scripture scholars of the second through fifth centuries provide us with a wealth of information on this subject.
Around 180 Irenaeus of Lyons wrote that
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their
----------
Answered by: Catholic Answers Staff
SINCE THIS ANSWER CAME FROM THE CATHOLICS,IT HAS NO FOUNDATION TO BE NON PARTISAN. TAKE IT WITH A GRAIN OF SALT AS MATTHEW, A LEARNED MAN COULD HAVE EASILY WRTTEN IT IN GREEK SINCE THAT WAS A COMMON WORLD WIDE LANGUAGE
2 thoughts

Jesus had disciples ..some educated as was Matthew .

It seems illogical that no Jewish man..who believed in the written words of the prophets ...would not have written down contemporary
Events as they became aware of WHO HE WAS .Mathews gospel COULD be a,completion of one of these efforts,...

Second I found this when it was speculated the APOSTLES DID NOT WRITE
because Jesus did not tell them to ...how do we know,EHAT He told them if not for the accounts ...DoD HE say speak in for sin languages ...YET THEY DID on Prntecostv.

Anyway this I FOUND INTERESTING ...

http://coldcasechristianity.com/2013/how-coul...

It makes great sense to me and a couple of others ..:)

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) 41 min PELE78 47,925
topix drops human sexuality forum.......this be... 1 hr Brian_G 12
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Inspector2 618,611
Ladies, what is the sexual act you most enjoy? 1 hr latinobbyloveu 6
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 1 hr Neville Thompson 382
ye olde village pub (Jun '07) 1 hr Voyeur 53,815
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Neville Thompson 44,706
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Inspector2 105,576
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr Neville Thompson 281,222
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr River Tam 971,569
American Soldiers - Duty, Honor, Country (Jun '11) 14 hr oneear69 38,711
More from around the web