Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 599547 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.

Cafe de La Paix

London, TX

#165717 Jan 29, 2010
flower wrote:
<quoted text>
thank you miss kathy...
I've caught this 'person' LTM, in at least 2 big lies. I'm sure it hit her like a ton of bricks, but that's besides the point.

She wants to be a 'conditional christian' AND she wants the rest of us to back her up, with her mushy, sugar-coated words, that reek with the word HIPOCRITE!

She's also very accusitive an goes about introducing thoughts into other people when she posts/blogs. This may be due to the fact that she (as she has admitted) has been in this type of environment or household scenarios. Who knows, she could very well just be making stuff up to see how far her deceptive and arrogant ways take her to! Kinda reminds me of that old verse "wolves in sheep clothing".

Whatever her treacherous scheme might be.......we can see thru her and it doesn't look bright or good, much less kosher.

She can keep trying to be a christian, but it looks as if 'father time' is not on her side. A woman her age, and who has very much wanted to be a different person, should by now have gone thru SOME change, don't you guys think? LOL.

We've all heard that the Word Of God is like a two-edge sword, so it should not surprise us all that if she is indeed being hurt and lacerated, it would only be because SHE still has a lot of rough edged that need to be smoothed out, and those rough and sharp 'edges' are doing her a disservice if you want to play ball with the Word. IOW, she's lacerating herself up and she's also OBLIVIOUS to it. Poor soul! Need I say more??

“Free gift means FREE”

Since: Jan 09

Chicagoland

#165718 Jan 29, 2010
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your continous posts on this forum, regarding the your "bible only nonsense" only shows your blind ignorance and oblivous rejection of the truth of Apostolic Historic Sacred Church History. From the year 100-400 in a sequence of events during that time:---The Church came first(NOT THE BIBLE)-then- It was the Bishops that compiled the books of the bible forming the Canon, regarding which books should be included, which ones should be left out! Read Church History! Get educated! Become spiritually enlightened to the truth! You might learn something. The fullness of the Faith, the Truth and Gods Grace, has been, is now and will continue to be in His One True Catholic Apostolic Church, initiated and established by Jesus Christ himself in Matt 16:18.(not the only Church-but His one true Church)
WHich came first; the O.T or the church? The O.T is part of your Bible right? For instance; look at Mt 4:4 and Deuteronomy 8:3. Jesus always referred to the O.T. So you're wrong; the Bible came first.

“Free gift means FREE”

Since: Jan 09

Chicagoland

#165719 Jan 29, 2010
The councils of the church played little part in the canonization of scripture. When councils did speak on the subject, their voice was a ratification of what had already become the mind of the church.(Lee Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate; Everett Ferguson, Factors Leading to the Selection and Closure of the New Testament Canon, p 319, 2002)
Even James Bernstein, an Orthodox leader admits: "The councils did not legislate the canon so much as set forth what had become self-evident truth and practice within the churches of God." (Which Came First: The Church or the New Testament?, Fr. James Bernstein, Orthodox churchman, 1994, p 13)
In other words, the New Testament canon is a recognition and acknowledgment of books that were authoritative from earlier periods on, not a creation of the fourth-century church.(Lee Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate; Peter Balla, Evidence for an Early Christian Canon: Second and Third Century, p 373, 2002)
Of interest here is the fact that the community of faith, rather than church authorities, were responsible for this process; what they determined to be edifying and useful later found a place in the canon. Church authorities only authorized or sanctioned what had already been in use.(Lee Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate; Kent D. Clarke, The Problem of Pseudonymity in Biblical Literature and Its Implications for Canon Formation, p 467, 2002)
In establishing the Canon, the Church authorities of the second and succeeding centuries only subsequently ratified the decisions which had already been reached by the Christian communities, or more exactly, by the individual believers. The organized Church as such did not create the Canon; it recognized the Canon which had already been created. It is only from the second half of the fourth century onwards, in connexion with the closing of the Canon, that the Church authorities began to have an effect." (David G. Meade, Pseudonymity and Canon, p 206, 1986)
http://www.bible.ca/b-canon-church-did-not-gi...

Since: Jan 10

Hilliard, OH

#165720 Jan 29, 2010
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your continous posts on this forum, regarding the your "bible only nonsense" only shows your blind ignorance and oblivous rejection of the truth of Apostolic Historic Sacred Church History. From the year 100-400 in a sequence of events during that time:---The Church came first(NOT THE BIBLE)-then- It was the Bishops that compiled the books of the bible forming the Canon, regarding which books should be included, which ones should be left out! Read Church History! Get educated! Become spiritually enlightened to the truth! You might learn something. The fullness of the Faith, the Truth and Gods Grace, has been, is now and will continue to be in His One True Catholic Apostolic Church, initiated and established by Jesus Christ himself in Matt 16:18.(not the only Church-but His one true Church)
forgive us if we believe God, who spent a few thousand years writing his book, in which he gave us to show who he is,, what he did for us, and what he wants us to do is the type of God that does not complete what he started,

The reasoning behind a God who is not capable of finishing a book he started and not make it complete is just amazing in our eyes..

I do not think you should condemn us because we trust God finishes what he started..

“May contain peanuts.”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#165721 Jan 29, 2010
Justified 7 wrote:
<quoted text>the word or implication of the word "dispensing" was never used. Just a typical insert of yours. The source said that God allowed it. And one more thing; evil is not a "thing"; you can't get a jar of evil buddy. You're lost as usual.
You can buy jars of evil in the gift shop of the church of John from NJ.

John himself drinks at least two jars of the stuff a day.

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#165722 Jan 29, 2010
Lmj wrote:
<quoted text> NO. we consider those Saints as a Family of God to pray for each other Eph 6:18, 1Pet 3:7, Rev 5:8
James 5:13-16, Mark 11,17 cause Luke 16:12 and Luke 11:1-13 and we pray and not give up(Luke 18:1-10) and no the Statues aren't venerated
Thankyou for your reply.
Custom Cal

Minneapolis, MN

#165723 Jan 29, 2010
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>all i'm looking for is the truth,paint any picture you like,you can not answer the question because you have no proof.why just you admit it.
Dear Drooling Peabrain,

Let your shelter nurse show you how normal people write sentences. HINT: They use capital letters to start sentences. And periods, not commas, at the end of sentences.
hojo

United States

#165724 Jan 29, 2010
Justified 7 wrote:
<quoted text>WHich came first; the O.T or the church? The O.T is part of your Bible right? For instance; look at Mt 4:4 and Deuteronomy 8:3. Jesus always referred to the O.T. So you're wrong; the Bible came first.
Wrong again "J"! You continue to bring up your "selected" Anti-Catholic articles that have more holes in them than "a piece of swiss cheese"! The writings may have been there but these and other books of the bible were not interpretated,recorded, selected,compiled, and grouped together until after the Church was established over 200 years later!--- Your allegiance to "Jack Chick" and his anti-Catholic bigotry doesn't hold any credibility with converts, like myself, who know the truth of Jesus Christ and His the One True Catholic Church! Again--read Sacred Traditional Apostolic Church History instead of "resurrecting" your own distorted opinion of the Truth! You've been trying to sell your
"solo scriptura" nonsense for months now, but no one on this forum,who knows the truth of our Lords one true church, is buying it!!
God Bless!
Kathy Daw

El Paso, TX

#165725 Jan 29, 2010
flower wrote:
<quoted text>
thank you miss kathy...
Hey, flower, I see the good in both of you, & I thought it was an opportune time to step in & help. Anytime!
Kathy Daw

El Paso, TX

#165726 Jan 29, 2010
Lmj wrote:
<quoted text> Venerate the Statue or the Saint? Twisting the Truth is deceitful Pad. You seem to talk a lot about reformers or reformed Churches yet you don't know much. The Anglicans hold Mary and the Saints to High regard, they're very much Catholic from the Crucifix to Statues and praying and veneration of saints much like the early reformed Churches
ANy church that bows to a statue is in the wrong, it is idol worship, whether Y church or W church, it doesn't matter. THe only one to bow to is Jesus Christ, no mary, to paul, no martha, no one but Jesus.
Kathy Daw

El Paso, TX

#165727 Jan 29, 2010
Lmj wrote:
<quoted text> but i can't say much to The Majority of 21Century protestants who commit bibliolatry
I only worship Jesus Christ, He alone is my Lord & Saviour. The bible is a book of the Word of God, I read the book, & the words brings my faith closer to God. The bible helps me to know & understand God. ALL CHRISTIANS SHOULD READ THE BIBLE, how else would you know if you are following Gods word or plan for your life, by some MAN telling you?????? What are you afraid of? GOd wants all His followers to know Him & His Word. Take the 1st step, pick it up, open it, & read. Awesome! But, remember, these are the Words of God, YOUR FATHER!

Since: Nov 08

usa

#165728 Jan 29, 2010
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
Your continous posts on this forum, regarding the your "bible only nonsense" only shows your blind ignorance and oblivous rejection of the truth of Apostolic Historic Sacred Church History. From the year 100-400 in a sequence of events during that time:---The Church came first(NOT THE BIBLE)-then- It was the Bishops that compiled the books of the bible forming the Canon, regarding which books should be included, which ones should be left out! Read Church History! Get educated! Become spiritually enlightened to the truth! You might learn something. The fullness of the Faith, the Truth and Gods Grace, has been, is now and will continue to be in His One True Catholic Apostolic Church, initiated and established by Jesus Christ himself in Matt 16:18.(not the only Church-but His one true Church)
just checked mat. 16 an i saw nothing stating anything,an why not use the scriptures? that's where the truth lies,not in what a bunch of bishops did by picking an choosing what went into the canon,they are just men,an you claim the church is Apostolic Historic Sacred Church,how is that possible when the church is lead by a pope? no apostle was a pope.peter was the leader of the apostles an he was not a pope and neither were the others,again mans creation,they claim to be the True Catholic Apostolic Church,but there is no proof of this.only the church believes it's bishops through apostolic succession, are consecrated successors of these apostles. it is not written anywhere that this is true so it must not be.

Since: Nov 08

usa

#165729 Jan 29, 2010
Custom Cal wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear Drooling Peabrain,
Let your shelter nurse show you how normal people write sentences. HINT: They use capital letters to start sentences. And periods, not commas, at the end of sentences.
grammar was not a strong subject with me,you must be catholic,your using the churches doctrine,be mean an nasty to all non Catholics,that's what commandment 11 or 12? how i type is not important as long as i get my thoughts out.you have any? or are you just good at calling people names??

Since: Nov 08

usa

#165730 Jan 29, 2010
Cafe de La Paix wrote:
<quoted text>
I've caught this 'person' LTM, in at least 2 big lies. I'm sure it hit her like a ton of bricks, but that's besides the point.
She wants to be a 'conditional christian' AND she wants the rest of us to back her up, with her mushy, sugar-coated words, that reek with the word HIPOCRITE!
She's also very accusitive an goes about introducing thoughts into other people when she posts/blogs. This may be due to the fact that she (as she has admitted) has been in this type of environment or household scenarios. Who knows, she could very well just be making stuff up to see how far her deceptive and arrogant ways take her to! Kinda reminds me of that old verse "wolves in sheep clothing".
Whatever her treacherous scheme might be.......we can see thru her and it doesn't look bright or good, much less kosher.
She can keep trying to be a christian, but it looks as if 'father time' is not on her side. A woman her age, and who has very much wanted to be a different person, should by now have gone thru SOME change, don't you guys think? LOL.
We've all heard that the Word Of God is like a two-edge sword, so it should not surprise us all that if she is indeed being hurt and lacerated, it would only be because SHE still has a lot of rough edged that need to be smoothed out, and those rough and sharp 'edges' are doing her a disservice if you want to play ball with the Word. IOW, she's lacerating herself up and she's also OBLIVIOUS to it. Poor soul! Need I say more??
i have asked a few times an you keep avoiding the question,why do you hate women so much??? what's with all the anger an hostility?

Since: Nov 08

usa

#165731 Jan 29, 2010
Kathy Daw wrote:
<quoted text>ANy church that bows to a statue is in the wrong, it is idol worship, whether Y church or W church, it doesn't matter. THe only one to bow to is Jesus Christ, no mary, to paul, no martha, no one but Jesus.
Hi Kathy just wondering do you go to a church? an which one?
Kathy Daw

El Paso, TX

#165732 Jan 29, 2010
jethro8 wrote:
<quoted text>Hi Kathy just wondering do you go to a church? an which one?
Yes Jethro, I go to Baptist church, although I am probably closer to the pentecostal faith. I don't have one in my immediate area. & I like the way this church reads the gospel. I get a lot out of it. We have a bible study before the service that I go to also, pretty cool. All ladies at the bible study.
Kathy Daw

El Paso, TX

#165734 Jan 29, 2010

Since: Nov 08

usa

#165736 Jan 29, 2010
Kathy Daw wrote:
<quoted text>Yes Jethro, I go to Baptist church, although I am probably closer to the pentecostal faith. I don't have one in my immediate area. & I like the way this church reads the gospel. I get a lot out of it. We have a bible study before the service that I go to also, pretty cool. All ladies at the bible study.
watched a show about a Pentecostal church an the preacher was praying with a bunch of poisonous snakes in his hands,thought that was a little strange,it was in Virginia.went to a baptist church once a long time ago cause a girl i was dating asked to go at least once just to see what it is like,so i went an i found that they like to sing a lot,at least at this church they did.what i didn't like was they would come around in a small bus an talk to children an hand out candy an tell them to ask there parents to bring them to their church,now that's wrong,that's just the Catholics instilling fear into their followers to keep them in line.
Dr_Arthur_Freder ick_Ide

Lima, Peru

#165737 Jan 29, 2010
Buckster wrote:
<quoted text>
I think you will find that the Knights Templar were not quite what you imagine them to have been, let's just say I wouldn't leave my wallet or my daughter unattended in their vicinity.
The Knights Templar were an ancient group of assassins. Within two decades of the victory of the First Crusade (1095-1099) a group of knights led by Hugues (Hugh) de Payens offered themselves to the Patriarch of Jerusalem to serve as a military force. Although it has been widely speculated that the Templars wished to keep it this way to cover their secret mission of digging for buried treasure on the Temple Mount, the simple fact remains that the lifestyle adopted by the Order was not to everyone's taste. Most were cutthroats and included numerous bishops, archbishops, even cardinals who killed for joy as would the later Pope Julius II. Philip IV - known as Philip le Belle (the Fair)- sought to destroy the Templars. Philip had the Templars arrested on October 13, 1307. The Templars were tortured and confessions were given. On March 18th, 1314 the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar, Jacques de Molay, was burned at the stake, for having recanted his earlier confessions of guilt. De Molay is said to have cursed King Philip and Pope Clement as he burned, asking both men to join him in death within a year. Both did, and with their deaths the Roman Catholic church's pretense of being a spiritual body evaporated and indulgences were sold, women burned as witches, young boys and cattle sodomized, and the priests became the parasites preying on the guillible--something copied by later religious groups such as Luther's nobility attacking the poor peasants in 1525, Calvin burning those who disagreed with him in the square of Geneva, and even today when Pat Robertson sets himself up as a god to rule that Haiti made a pact with the devil.
Dr_Arthur_Freder ick_Ide

Lima, Peru

#165738 Jan 29, 2010
Old Altar Boy wrote:
<quoted text>
I was thinking about this subject the other day. Yes, I am a strict Catholic. The Pope's word is rule. It matters not if you personally agree with it or not. As a good Catholic you do as told. For you to have the nerve to say the Pontiff was out of line was unforgivable. People such as yourself should go to another church. It will keep the trouble makers out of mine. If you have not converted you truly should talk with your priest & of course go to confession.
Only a fool would "confess" transgressions to another mortal--for even in the ancient religions of Africa, people directly communicated with their hosts of gods and goddesses; there is no biblical foundation for confession--for that is something that Augustine of Hippo and his pal Ambrose invented--and was soundly rejected by the emperors who were in charge of the church. Christianity was never about confession, but about conquest and destroying dissenters, for it took the Emperor Constantine to call a Council of Nicea to create a church that no Jesus created, and it was the emperor who gave letters patent to bishops--the least important being the weak bishop of Rome.

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) 1 min Stilgar Fifrawi 864,274
The Christian Atheist debate 1 min HipGnosis 1,970
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 1 min middleman1 2,775
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 min RiccardoFire 40,862
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 1 min The swamiji 7,491
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 9 min -Stray Dog 6,426
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 31 min WasteWater 6,294
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 hr Great Day of Arma... 612,898
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 7 hr Pegasus 272,404
More from around the web