Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 542,218
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
truth

Perth, Australia

#501784 Dec 21, 2013
why you need meat pum full of bactery and virus soft drinks and so on

proveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
who is liarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rr

do you need corupt justice system and corupt ministers and lawyers and judes and media and corupt police

cemetry never exist no no no
why should beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

fast fast fast against wicket snary world
truth

Perth, Australia

#501785 Dec 21, 2013
u ciju se mjesinu uvlacite davlije spodobe

fast fast fast
truth

Perth, Australia

#501786 Dec 21, 2013
fast against wicket corupt develish satanic organization

yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

why you need blessing from them

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#501787 Dec 22, 2013
The Secret Gospel of Mark I -- The Discovery.

In 1958, Morton Smith, an eminent Columbia University professor of history, discovered a 1646 edition of Isaac Voss’ Genuine Letters of Ignatius in the library of the Mar Saba monastery, which is near Jerusalem. In the back of that book, scribbled in ink on three blank pages, is what appears to be a handwritten copy of a letter from Clement of Alexandra to someone named Theodore.

Clement was a well-known 2nd century Christian writer and the head of a Christian school run by the first church in Alexandria, Egypt, which the evangelist Mark, the putative author of the Gospel of Mark, is said to have founded. If Theodore ever existed, he is lost to history, as is the original letter to him from Clement. Indeed, the pages that bore the partial copy of Cement’s letter, which Smith photographed, may be lost to history as well, though Smith’s black and white photographs and a librarian’s later color set remain. What also remains is the content of part of that letter, thanks to the late Professor Smith. And that content represents either a spectacular fraud on Christianity or a powerful challenge to the Christian religion as we know it today.

In a nutshell, the letter, often referred to as the Mar Saba Clementine Fragment, but more often simply as the Theodore Letter, speaks of a secret, longer version of the Gospel of Mark, which is now commonly referred to as Secret Mark. That there was an alternate version of the Gospel of Mark is not a surprise, for there were many variants of all the gospels in antiquity. But the contents of this secret gospel are nothing but shocking, for they suggest that a possibly earlier version of Mark was a Gnostic gospel that showed Jesus using secret initiation rites similar to those of the ubiquitous pagan mystery religions of his time. Further, it is possible that the initiation ritual that Jesus used involved a sexual union with a young man, though Clement vehemently disavows such an interpretation in the Theodore Letter.

A few critical scholars and many other commentators have argued that Theodore is a modern fraud. A few have even pointed a finger at Morton Smith as the perpetrator. But over the last 40 years since Smith first published Clement’s letter, virtually all Clement experts have come to accept the letter as genuine. At the same time, many of them believe the sections of Secret Mark in the Theodore Letter are 2nd century additions to the original Gospel of Mark. Nevertheless, more and more scholars have argued that the Secret Mark passages in the Theodore Letter predate the version of Mark in our modern-day Bible and the version of the Gospel of Mark in the New Testament is an abbreviated version of Secret Mark.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#501788 Dec 22, 2013
The Secret Gospel of Mark II -- John Mark and the First Gospel.

We know little about Mark, or John Mark, the putative author of the gospel that bears his name. We do not even know whether Mark actually wrote the gospel he is credited with, though it is safe to say that critical scholars overwhelmingly believe he did not.

Exactly when and where Mark wrote his gospel, if he is in fact the author, is not certain. The early Christians who sought to answer that question for us do not agree completely. According to Eusebius, a 3rd century Christian writer, Mark wrote his gospel in Rome, and in the 2nd century, Irenaeus claimed it was after the death of Peter, which is supported by a prologue to the Gospel of Mark in some old Latin manuscripts. But John Chrysostom, a 4th century writer, tells us it was in Egypt, and Clement of Alexandria believed Peter was still alive at the time.

In the 17th century, Richard Simon, an eminent Catholic scholar in France, argued both traditions were correct and Mark wrote two versions of his gospel, one in Rome and the other in Egypt. This theory was never widely accepted, and scholars consistently have favored the tradition of a Roman or Syrian origin after Peter’s death, though not by Mark’s hand. But if the Theodore Letter is genuine, it tells us that Richard Simon was on the right track: The church in Alexandria may originally have had a different version of the Gospel of Mark than the church in Rome, and the Alexandrian version may have been the long version, that is, Secret Mark, while Rome may have had an abbreviated version, which ultimately became the Gospel of Mark we know from the Bible.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#501789 Dec 22, 2013
The Secret Gospel of Mark III -- The Text.

The Secret Gospel of Mark is actually little more than a couple provisions not contained in canonical Mark but contained in a letter from Titus Flavius Clemens, or Clement of Alexandria, to someone named Theodore. In the letter, Clement tells Theodore that what Theodore was told by the Carpocratians, a libertine gnostic sect of Christians, is untrue. Yes, according to Clement, there is a longer version of Mark that contains some but not all that the Carpocratians claim. Clement then quotes passages from that longer version. From his version of it:
Clement wrote:
....

To you, therefore, I shall not hesitate to answer the questions you have asked, refuting the falsifications by the very words of the gospel. For example, after “And they were in the road going up to Jerusalem” and what follows, until “After three days he shall arise”, the secret gospel brings the following material word for word:

"And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him,‘Son of David, have mercy on me.’ But the disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb.
And going near, Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightaway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb, they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan."

After these words follows the text,“And James and John come to him,” and all that section. But “naked man with naked man,” and the other things about which you wrote, are not found.

And after the words,“And he comes into Jericho,” the secret Gospel adds only,“And the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome were there, and Jesus did not receive them.” But the many other things about which you wrote both seem to be, and are, falsifications.....1
1. Smith, Morton, Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 447.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#501790 Dec 22, 2013
The Secret Gospel of Mark IV – Tying Secret Mark to Canonical Mark.

In the Theodore Letter, Clement tells us where the two fragments of Secret Mark belong in canonical Mark. The first and longer of the two sections goes between Mark 10:34 and 0:35. And because of the parallels with John’s story of Lazarus, this is not surprising, since this is the same point in John’s narrative where the Lazarus story appears, and this story seems to be an earlier version of Lazarus’ story.

The second scrap of Secret Mark goes between the first and second sentences in Mark 10:46, making the verse read:

"And he comes into Jericho. And the sister of the young man Jesus loved was there with his mother and Salome, but Jesus received them not. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a sizable crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind man, the son of Timaeus, sat by the roadside begging."

Morton Smith argued that there probably was more to the Jericho narrative in Secret Mark than what Clement lets on in the Theodore Letter. According to Smith, the last clause in the new sentence,“but Jesus received them not,” was a phrase canonical Mark never uses but Clement often did -- that is, Clement deleted material from the pericope before relaying it to Theodore. It is important to note that Mark 10:46 in the canon represents a well-known lacuna -- or gap -- in canonical Mark, and it is likely the Carpocratian version of Mark contained even more material that filled that gap with details of what Jesus did in Jericho. My guess? It contained some of the material that later found its way into John

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#501791 Dec 22, 2013
The Secret Gospel of Mark V -- Understanding Mark as Polemics.

The earliest extant Christian writing, aside from the genuine letters of Paul, is the gospel of Mark.

Mark is a marvelous work of fiction. It was written anonymously and later attributed, almost certainly incorrectly, to John Mark, son of Mary of Jerusalem. It was written in the 70's after the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the 2nd temple. And it comes to us in a crude Greek that probably was written by a Gentile or Hellenized Jew who was a masterful storyteller but not the best linguist and not a resident of Palestine, as John Mark was.

Perhaps seizing on the moment weakness for the early Jerusalem church that came after the fall of Jerusalem, with most members of the Jerusalem church likely killed or dispersed with the rest of Jerusalem's residents in the siege, Mark is written as a polemic against Jesus' closest followers, the Jerusalem Church, including members of Jesus' family.

Mark's author was anti-family -- biological family that is, especially Jesus' family. And he sought to portray the Twelve as a bunch of dolts. In short, he sought to portray the key members of the then-dead-or-dispersed Jerusalem church as misguided.

In Mark, the Twelve just don't get it or don't measure up. They don't understand Jesus' parables, argue among themselves about who is the most worthy, fall asleep during guard watch, and even deny Jesus in his hour of need.

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#501792 Dec 22, 2013
The Secret Gospel of Mark VI – Tying Secret Mark, Canonical Mark, and GoJohn Together.

Enter Marvin Meyer. Meyer sees in canonical Mark and the scraps of Secret Mark that Morton Smith found a significant subplot involving a young man that existed in an earlier version of Mark. I think he is correct. That subplot is incomplete even with the addition of what we have of Secret Mark, but in a nutshell, it starts with the unnamed rich youth in Mark 10.

That rich youth wants salvation but won't give up his wealth to attain it. Even though Jesus looks on that youth and immediately "loved him", Jesus says the boy's attachment to his wealth is too great. Later, from Secret Mark, probably belonging to the same chapter, a youth falls ill, dies, is raised from the dead, loves Jesus, and spends the night with him.

Further on in canonical Mark, in Chapter 14, a youth wearing only a linen cloth has that cloth yanked from him and runs away naked as Jesus is arrested. Finally, in Chapter 16 of canonical Mark, an unnamed youth is discovered in Jesus' otherwise empty tomb. That unnamed youth gives instructions to the women who went to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus on how to hook up with Jesus in Galilee. There, canonical Mark ends abruptly, with only about half a dozen verses following, which were added much later.

Enter the Gospel of John, Miles Fowler, and Evan Powell. The Gospel of John contains two stories that may be relevant to Meyer's perceived subplot in longer Mark: the story of Lazarus and the story of the Beloved Disciple.

Many scholars see Lazarus as a later version of the Secret Mark story of an unnamed youth being raised from the dead. And that makes sense. As Miles Fowler first noted, John tells us it was the Lazarus miracle that resulted in the authorities deciding to put both Jesus and Lazarus to death. And if the unnamed young man in Secret Mark who is raised from the dead is Lazarus, and the naked young man in Mark 14 is that same youth, that may explain why the authorities sought to capture him as well as Jesus. According to John, they wanted to kill both Jesus and Lazarus. That doesn't make it so, it just makes it more likely that the Lazarus tradition emanated from this earlier version of Mark.
truth

Perth, Australia

#501793 Dec 22, 2013
all holy scripture say

prosecution righteousness people
yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

law not exst
you don't need respet law
not at all

on cross inri

no law
no mercy
not love

byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

christ full law
don't respect law any more
truth

Perth, Australia

#501794 Dec 22, 2013
why you need respect corupt evil satanic law

nooooooooooooooooooooo
truth

Perth, Australia

#501795 Dec 22, 2013
if your rights someone take complite from you

don't respect corupt law
noooooooooooooooooooooooooo

“Let the Children”

Since: Aug 08

Come To Me

#501796 Dec 22, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
The Secret Gospel of Mark V -- Understanding Mark as Polemics.
The earliest extant Christian writing, aside from the genuine letters of Paul, is the gospel of Mark.
Mark is a marvelous work of fiction. It was written anonymously and later attributed, almost certainly incorrectly, to John Mark, son of Mary of Jerusalem. It was written in the 70's after the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the 2nd temple. And it comes to us in a crude Greek that probably was written by a Gentile or Hellenized Jew who was a masterful storyteller but not the best linguist and not a resident of Palestine, as John Mark was.
Perhaps seizing on the moment weakness for the early Jerusalem church that came after the fall of Jerusalem, with most members of the Jerusalem church likely killed or dispersed with the rest of Jerusalem's residents in the siege, Mark is written as a polemic against Jesus' closest followers, the Jerusalem Church, including members of Jesus' family.
Mark's author was anti-family -- biological family that is, especially Jesus' family. And he sought to portray the Twelve as a bunch of dolts. In short, he sought to portray the key members of the then-dead-or-dispersed Jerusalem church as misguided.
In Mark, the Twelve just don't get it or don't measure up. They don't understand Jesus' parables, argue among themselves about who is the most worthy, fall asleep during guard watch, and even deny Jesus in his hour of need.
Well I certainly agree on the fiction part .
What better way for either Religious,Jews,...or zealots...or Romans,..though it sounds,more like it comes from religious people who hated Christ
...,to discredit Jesus,and his follower them making .up a,Sodom.like,story and attributing it to a,younger of the disciples ..associated with the apostles,...EHAT a disgusting piece of trash ..worthy of Hollywood ..

There were also stories of a,superboy type,young Jesus,....

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#501797 Dec 22, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
Amen Dear Lord, I thank you for "RoSesz and her gently heart Dear Lord.
All Praise and Glory belongs to you, you alone are worthy.
You do know that this isn't really the birthday of Jesus Christ, it's simply a man made date, I really believe his death has more importance than celebrating his birthday.
Liam

Chicago, IL

#501798 Dec 22, 2013
Working for the Lord wrote:
<quoted text> You do know that this isn't really the birthday of Jesus Christ, it's simply a man made date, I really believe his death has more importance than celebrating his birthday.
Yes His death is more important. That's why the Universal Church of Christ calls lent and Easter the most holiest time of the year. Do you guys observe Christmas and Easter?

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#501799 Dec 22, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Well you're in no position to tell anyone what the scriptures are saying. The Holy Spirit does not guide your interpretations.
That's right!!! The new testament was compiled by Catholics for Catholic use ONLY. And just as the Catholics should not have messed with the Jew's religious literature, the Protestants shouldn't mess with Catholic literature.

Those in religion steal words from other religions, twist them and add other words to suit their own religions, and then pretend they didn't twist meanings ... or commit any theft whatsoever.

For instance ... without the religion of the Jews, there would BE no Catholic religion ... as Catholicism was simply a rotten branch that grew off of the rotten tree of Judaism.

Those in both religions swore on their supposed holy books that they knew truth from a god ... and that was a lie.
Chess Jurist

Columbus, OH

#501800 Dec 22, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I certainly agree on the fiction part .
What better way for either Religious,Jews,...or zealots...or Romans,..though it sounds,more like it comes from religious people who hated Christ
...,to discredit Jesus,and his follower them making .up a,Sodom.like,story and attributing it to a,younger of the disciples ..associated with the apostles,...EHAT a disgusting piece of trash ..worthy of Hollywood ..
There were also stories of a,superboy type,young Jesus,....
Everyone has an opinion.

I fall with Helmut Koester.

Secret Mark is an ancestor of canonical Mark.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#501801 Dec 22, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
[who="June VanDerMark"]<quoted text>
You CHOOSE to be a homophobic FOOL! Religious myths started because of FEAR.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>
Assyrian clay tablet points to 'Sodom and Gomorrah' asteroid
A Cuneiform clay tablet which for over 150 years defied attempts at interpretation has now been revealed to describe an asteroid impact which in 3123 BC hit Köfels, Austria, leaving in its wake a trail of destruction which may acccount for the biblical tale of Sodom and Gomorrah.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/31/kofel ...
----------
Would you like the exact details...that did not need 150 years of attempts at interpretation?
Gen 19:24 Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven.
God has no problem with shattering an asteroid right where He wants it.
KayMarie
I understand that you feel powerful when you use scriptures that you brag are supported by a god to in turn support your OWN homophobia.

You and Fred Phelps make a vile pair ... waving your bibles in the air as though they account for something good.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#501802 Dec 22, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
KayMarie, if people would read the bible they would find the answers to many problems scientist are looking for today.
That is funny!
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#501803 Dec 22, 2013
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
Cly said, quote, "Many people are probably born attracted to the same sex (homosexuals). That's not a sin. The sin is when you put your sexual organ in someones digestive system or act in other sexual ways towards someone of the same sex." End quote.
Many people were born homosexuals? Really? According to you people have been born murderers, thieves and liars. Do you believe God created the homosexual cell, the murderer cell, the thief cell and the liar cell and planted these cells in certain people? Why would God create homosexuals, murderers, liars and thieves? Being a homosexual, murderer, thief, liar and all other sins is a choice. When a thief steals they chose to steal. When a murderer murders they chose to murder. When a liar lies they chose to lie. When a sodomite sticks his sexual organ into the rectum of another man you say, "God made him that way". Really. Are you that stupid!
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
No. What i said was "many people are PROBABLY born attracted to the same sex. I don't know for sure. My personal opinion is that some people were and some were not. In some cases of homosexuality, biology is the reason and sociaology or psychology is the other. There is allot of data coming in that shows many were born that way. How could simply being attracted to the same sex be a sin then, for those who are born that way thru no fault of their own?
You bible worshipers only focus on verse verse verse. This confuses you when people bring in reason and logic to the argument.
So you believe God created a homosexual? Really? God does not make mistakes, however, His creation does. God did not create a murderer, homosexual, liar, thief or slanderer. God's creation CHOSE to be a murderer. God's creation CHOSE to be a homosexual. God's creation CHOSE to be a liar. God's creation CHOSE to be a thief. God's creation CHOSE to be a slanderer.

Just as ADAM and EVE chose to sin in a perfect garden so do we. Sin is an inside job and is a C H O I C E.

Cly said, "There is allot of data coming in that shows many were born that way. How could simply being attracted to the same sex be a sin then, for those who are born that way thru no fault of their own?" End quote.

Perhaps your scientists will determine every murderer should not be in prison because they were born with the MURDER gene. Maybe every rapist and thief should be released from prison because they were born with the rapist and thief gene and what they did is not really their fault. Should society release Charles Manson and every serial killer and rapist that are in prison because what they did is not their fault. God made them a killer and a rapist. Right?

You are as dumb as a post. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Cly, I have some ocean front property in Arizona for sale. Cheap. Are you interested?

FREE WILL------ever heard of FREE WILL?

Logic and reason? Your logic has no reason other than to justify your sin and promote the perversion your self professed church endorses. Put that is your logical pipe and smoke it OldCly.

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min New Age Spiritual... 738,980
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 5 min Dimple Pimp 3,076
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 7 min lil whispers 601,061
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 8 min Charlie Sheen 259,292
Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 16 min EdmondWA 95,464
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay 17 min andet1987 1
Ask Me A Trivia Question -- 2 -- (Mar '10) 19 min Frank Smythe 191,461
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Catcher1 173,663
•••
Enter and win $5000

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••