Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

[4GVN]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
So you're jumping on the bandwagon too, eh? Well, I'm not surprised since that's the first sign of someone who's lost every debate with Catholics here.
Knew what? That some priests abused? Yes, I'm sure he did. Approved of some of the bishops covering it up? Absolutely not one shred of evidence has ever been produced that he or the previous popes did.
By the way, you are of course aware that many of the leaders in the SBC do know about abusers in your ranks and still refuse to allow for full internal disclosure?

lol, you sound a lot like your buddy Preston.
I have lost no debate.
The fact is you post 'spam' and then when it is refuted you have nothing to come back with on your own and you 'run away'.
It seems that you are much more impressed with yourself than I am.

[4GVN]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
He re-named him "Rock" (not "little pebble"), He gave him the keys, He charged him with feeding His sheep, gave him the power to bind and loose. Case closed.

God's word says 'little pebble'. Sorry! For you.

[confrinting with the word]

confrinting with the word wrote:

Anthony said that the RCC is responsible for Western Civilization.
**********
It was illegal for a CC to hold public office in America in most, if not all states, as the foundation of America was being laid.

KayMarie

~~~

AFTER ABRAHAM LINCOLNS ASSASSINATION....because of the 8 or 9 Roman Catholics that were involved...(there were five found guilty and hung
for the crime.) plus John Wilkes Booth ..a Catholic who was shot and killed.

It was 100 years ..from 1863 till John F. Kennedy ( a Roman Catholic.) was elected in 1960 and was assassinated in 1963 .

The same year that prayer was successfully expunged from public schools in America.

[4GVN]

The first church, its growth, doctrine, and practices, were recorded for us in the New Testament. Jesus, as well as His apostles, foretold that false teachers would arise, and indeed it is apparent from some of the New Testament epistles that these apostles had to fight against false teachers early on. Having a pedigree of apostolic succession or being able to trace a church's roots back to the "first church" is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church. What is given is repeated comparisons between what false teachers teach and what the first church taught, as recorded in Scripture. Whether a church is the "true church" or not is determined by comparing its teachings and practices to that of the New Testament church, as recorded in Scripture.

For instance, in Acts 20:17-38, the Apostle Paul has an opportunity to talk to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus one last time face to face. In that passage, he tells them that false teachers will not only come among them but will come FROM them (vv. 29-30). Paul does not set forth the teaching that they were to follow the "first" organized church as a safeguard for the truth. Rather, he commits them to the safekeeping of "God and to the word of His grace" (v. 32). Thus, truth could be determined by depending upon God and "the word of His grace" (i.e., Scripture, see John 10:35).

[4GVN]

Dependence upon the Word of God, rather than following certain individual "founders" is seen again in Galatians 1:8-9, in which Paul states, "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed." Thus, the basis for determining truth from error is not based upon even WHO it is that is teaching it,“we or an angel from heaven,” but whether it is the same gospel that they had already received – and this gospel is recorded in Scripture.

Another example of this dependence upon the Word of God is found in 2 Peter. In this epistle, the Apostle Peter is fighting against false teachers. In doing so, Peter begins by mentioning that we have a "more sure word" to depend upon than even hearing the voice of God from heaven as they did at Jesus' transfiguration (2 Peter 1:16-21). This “more sure word” is the written Word of God. Peter later tells them again to be mindful of "the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets and the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior" (2 Peter 3:2). Both the words of the holy prophets and the commandments Jesus gave to the apostles are recorded in Scripture.

[truth]

Jesus explain wicket world as water.
They think they are smart..but it is as it is as Wave come its going splash on send and dry up on hot sun as vapor in hell.
Don't be liar.Wicket can't have holy ticket.

When you cut tree from old roots branch come green beautiful pure modern then you really think.

When wicket people try kill or sacrifice on altar big lio..its for them broken Altar..where wicket forget
lio is still Alive.

Branch of tree still is green.Spring
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...
http://bible.cc/numbers/16-19.htm

When others try stop God always stay in control.

byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyy

[truth]

false witness is not good..o confe
what a shame
read again
about what?
signature who garantee

o moj Jure dobro moje
ako ces ih poznat
crne gace
bjeim koncem okrpljene...

[truth]

people wisdom
sto blejis
kad te niko neshisha
kad se ovcasisa
kad je vruce u ljeto..

Mara ovce shisha
pripomaze i radia
radite

who give you signature accordin law as garantee

o moj Jure =george
dobro moje
lako ce ih poznat
crne gace
bijelim koncem okrpljene..

[TheBlackSheep]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
Everyone of your posts starts with "it's obvious he knew!!!!!", but you have yet to produce one shred of evidence that he knew of any covering up of abuse. Produce it or remain in your hypothetical little world.

How many times must I quote this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abu ...
In the 1950s, Gerald Fitzgerald, the founder of a religious order that treats Roman Catholic priests who molest children, concluded "(such) offenders were unlikely to change and should not be returned to ministry," and this was discussed with Pope Paul VI (1897 – 1978) and "in correspondence with several bishops."[6]

The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (CICA) is one of a range of measures introduced by the Irish Government to investigate the extent and effects of abuse on children from 1936 onwards.

Bernard Francis Law, Cardinal and Archbishop of Boston, Massachusetts, United States resigned after Church documents were revealed which suggested he had covered up sexual abuse committed by priests in his archdiocese.[95] On December 13, 2002 Pope John Paul II accepted Law's resignation as Archbishop and reassigned him to an administrative position in the Roman Curia naming him archpriest of the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, and he later presided at one of the Pope's funeral masses.

[TheBlackSheep]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
Most of your posts are hypothetical, but you can't deal with hypothetical? Let's just say that your very existence here is in no small part due to the Catholic Church keeping the barbarians from overrunning Europe and preserving science, technology, art, academics, social structure, etc. Explain to me, hypothetical or otherwise, how I'm wrong.

Are you smoking something? Popping a few pills or what?

You cannot say how anything would have turned out, you can only speculate.

I recall a number stories of the catholic church holding science back.

[TheBlackSheep]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
I've read the wiki article many times. None of it or any other evidence exists showing that the pope knew of or condoned any cover up of sex abuse. That is your contention. Did popes know that some priests were guilty of abuse? I'm sure they did. There was and is a disciplinary process for such clerics, but the pope wasn't and isn't "in charge" of the tribunals.

Nice try at moving the goal post!

[TheBlackSheep]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
Everyone of your posts starts with "it's obvious he knew!!!!!", but you have yet to produce one shred of evidence that he knew of any covering up of abuse. Produce it or remain in your hypothetical little world.

Actually, none of my posts started with, "it's obvious he knew!!!!!"

You have lied, moved the goal post and blindly denied evidence, the only conclusion that I can make is; you a sad little troll looking for anyone to fight with.

Have fun!

[Clay]

4GVN wrote:

The first church, its growth, doctrine, and practices, were recorded for us in the New Testament. Jesus, as well as His apostles, foretold that false teachers would arise, and indeed it is apparent from some of the New Testament epistles that these apostles had to fight against false teachers early on. Having a pedigree of apostolic succession or being able to trace a church's roots back to the "first church" is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church. What is given is repeated comparisons between what false teachers teach and what the first church taught, as recorded in Scripture. Whether a church is the "true church" or not is determined by comparing its teachings and practices to that of the New Testament church, as recorded in Scripture.
For instance, in Acts 20:17-38, the Apostle Paul has an opportunity to talk to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus one last time face to face. In that passage, he tells them that false teachers will not only come among them but will come FROM them (vv. 29-30). Paul does not set forth the teaching that they were to follow the "first" organized church as a safeguard for the truth. Rather, he commits them to the safekeeping of "God and to the word of His grace" (v. 32). Thus, truth could be determined by depending upon God and "the word of His grace" (i.e., Scripture, see John 10:35).

you guys are so clueless, you don't even realize you're the people Paul was talking about.
The Catholic and Orthodox teachings don't change. Yours changes from generation to generation.
Sola scripture.
You are preaching a false gospel and no one can say anything because you created a fantasy of Sola Scripture. This false teaching opened the door to thousands of more false teachings.

[_BobLoblah_]

confrinting with the word wrote:

<quoted text>
~~~
AFTER ABRAHAM LINCOLNS ASSASSINATION....because of the 8 or 9 Roman Catholics that were involved...(there were five found guilty and hung
for the crime.) plus John Wilkes Booth ..a Catholic who was shot and killed.
It was 100 years ..from 1863 till John F. Kennedy ( a Roman Catholic.) was elected in 1960 and was assassinated in 1963 .
The same year that prayer was successfully expunged from public schools in America.

31Dec12.....

.....ListenUP you schidt-for-brains....

Ps: People who comtemplate to commit murder and people who actually carry out the Mortal Sin of murder/killing are NOT Christians let alone Roman Catholic.

A whole lotta eeejits like you 'still' argue dat Hitler was a Roman Catholic when the Truth of the matter is that Hitler stopped practicing his Faith when he was about aged 20.

For Christ's sake, don't these people unnerstan dat Hitler began to have burned Jewish Synagogues and Catholic Churches when he became Chancellor in 1933. The Church building he kept, he used them as offices for his Nazi henchmen and/or barracks. Its all there in da History Books. Not dat long ago.

So you take your envy and jealousy towards the Roman Catholics and shove 'em up yer arseHole where they belong...along with yer yead.

Merry Christmas. Phuck you berry much toooooooo.

Forever and Ever
BobLoblah

[TheBlackSheep]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah, the protestants were really into equality weren't they? And I'm sure you're so proud of them. Don't you wish those laws were still in place? Hey Kay, do you allow blacks or Asians in your pentecostal compound?

African-American Catholics

Because the ante-bellum South was predominantly Protestant, most African-Americans who adopted Christianity became Protestant. However, there have been African-American Catholics since colonial times. Irish, Italian and Eastern European Catholics and their clergy often excluded blacks from local parishes.[citation needed] Many blacks simply felt more at home in their birthright Protestant churches, where adaptable liturgies and ministerial opportunities meant that black Christians could worship their own way more readily than in Latin-rite Catholicism

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rom...

" their clergy often excluded blacks from local parishes."

[Clay]

TheBlackSheep wrote:

<quoted text>
African-American Catholics
Because the ante-bellum South was predominantly Protestant, most African-Americans who adopted Christianity became Protestant. However, there have been African-American Catholics since colonial times. Irish, Italian and Eastern European Catholics and their clergy often excluded blacks from local parishes.[citation needed] Many blacks simply felt more at home in their birthright Protestant churches, where adaptable liturgies and ministerial opportunities meant that black Christians could worship their own way more readily than in Latin-rite Catholicism
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rom...
" their clergy often excluded blacks from local parishes."

Archbishop John Ireland of the Twin Cities in the 19th century into the 20th included African Americans in every way possible. Including hiring them along with Irish immigrants to build the Cathedral.
I don't doubt that a bishop somewhere in the South around the late 19th century was a racist.

His views would have been contrary to Catholicism. Its also a shame people like you let it a few bad apples taint the 1 billion member Church and her perfect teachings. I understand you need to do this. How else can you be anti Catholic then to be ignorant?

[Free Mind]

Why would Jesus "one true" and solely guided church ---------- require diplomatic immunity?

And why would Jesus use someone like Bonito Mussolini to protect His supposed one-true church?

Ouch!!! As in impossible. Jesus is not a creep.

[Free Mind]

Anthony MN wrote:

<quoted text>
I've read the wiki article many times. None of it or any other evidence exists showing that the pope knew of or condoned any cover up of sex abuse. That is your contention. Did popes know that some priests were guilty of abuse? I'm sure they did. There was and is a disciplinary process for such clerics, but the pope wasn't and isn't "in charge" of the tribunals.

The discipline was to quietly "rehab" the child abuser, transfer to a new Parrish, and to stonewall any inquiry.

No?

This is exactly how it was handled consistently on 5 continents. Some Bishops wrote to Roman about the problem, but nothing changed.

So much for those perfect teachings on morals. BUSTED.

[Free Mind]

Morals 101....

#1: Facilitating child abuse is immoral, even if not technically illegal.

No matter what Catholics insist, I continue to say Jesus would NOT ALLOW a child-abuser or child-abuse facilitator to remain as an Apostle.

The RCC says differently (see Cardinal Law).

I am glad Catholics call me sick for disagreeing with the Roman church's position. I am honored. Thank you.

I say Jesus meant what he said in Mark 9:42 and Matthew 7:15. Catholics claim that's just metaphor, not literal.

No Catholics, Jesus is not a creep. Jesus would have protected a child who came to Him -- from the sexual advances of any Apostle.

[New Age Spiritual Leader]

Robert F wrote:

<quoted text>
NASL
It is a deep subject and difficult to put into words....
"One needs to learn, then understand, and decide to follow God and His Way, and not one's own will(which in darkness seeks to usurp God's Will)."
One needs to learn (God's Will)...,
Then understand (God's Will)...,
And decide to follow God's Will....
One's own will tends to follow its human nature, thus becomes trapped in its own passions of the body, as well as its intellectual affinites. This creates "whirlpools", that tend to move the will towards itself, and in its own desires, namely concupiscence....
It is for this reason that the "will" is appetitive because of desire(though as you write, it can be motivated by fear...,i.e. mainly fear of loss, or fear of loss of desire, and intellect). I think it has to do with the fear of loss of identity....That one becomes just another face in the crowd. Or, in this case fear of loss of one's identity in God.
Free-will comes into play when the will is at liberty to choose the good over the bad(the light over the dark). There is great difficulty in "recollection", that is summing up the forces which the will desires, or to even realize them. It is more often than not we think we are strong; when we are weak, and weak; when we are strong.(This is the"whirlpool" effect) in the soul, to which we seek "liberty"....free-wi ll.

In short -'free will' is Self.

Yet you skip over this key aspect so easily, as if it doesn't exists. Why? Shoot - you even refuse to acknowledge it as anything.

"To know yourself is to know the kingdom of God."
- Jesus

Why don't you believe Jesus?