Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 560,189
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
LTM

Fort Frances, Canada

#422299 Feb 13, 2013
Jesus’ brothers are mentioned in several Bible verses. Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Jesus’ mother and brothers came to see Him. The Bible tells us that Jesus had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55). The Bible also tells us that Jesus had sisters, but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:56). In John 7:1-10, His brothers go on to the festival while Jesus stays behind. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother are described as praying with the disciples. Galatians 1:19 mentions that James was Jesus’ brother. The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Jesus had actual blood half-siblings.
Some Roman Catholics claim that these “brothers” were actually Jesus’ cousins. However, in each instance, the specific Greek word for “brother” is used. While the word can refer to other relatives, its normal and literal meaning is a physical brother. There was a Greek word for “cousin,” and it was not used. Further, if they were Jesus’ cousins, why would they so often be described as being with Mary, Jesus’ mother? There is nothing in the context of His mother and brothers coming to see Him that even hints that they were anyone other than His literal, blood-related, half-brothers.
LTM

Fort Frances, Canada

#422300 Feb 13, 2013
A second Roman Catholic argument is that Jesus’ brothers and sisters were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage. An entire theory of Joseph's being significantly older than Mary, having been previously married, having multiple children, and then being widowed before marrying Mary is invented without any biblical basis. The problem with this is that the Bible does not even hint that Joseph was married or had children before he married Mary. If Joseph had at least six children before he married Mary, why are they not mentioned in Joseph and Mary’s trip to Bethlehem (Luke 2:4-7) or their trip to Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15) or their trip back to Nazareth (Matthew 2:20-23)?

There is no biblical reason to believe that these siblings are anything other than the actual children of Joseph and Mary. Those who oppose the idea that Jesus had half-brothers and half-sisters do so, not from a reading of Scripture, but from a preconceived concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary, which is itself clearly unbiblical:“But he (Joseph) had no union with her (Mary) until she gave birth to a son. And he gave Him the name Jesus”(Matthew 1:25). Jesus had half-siblings, half-brothers and half-sisters, who were the children of Joseph and Mary. That is the clear and unambiguous teaching of God’s Word.
Catholic Girl

Bethpage, NY

#422301 Feb 13, 2013
You know, one doesn't have to keep posting this stuff. The book is call the bible, pick it up yourself and read it.

why depend on these non creditentials people to influence you.

no wonder satan has it easy.
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#422302 Feb 13, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
No sir, the New Testament does not say its sufficient for all Church issues. That's ridiculous and you know it.
2 Tim. 3:16-17, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

17 he explains that this is so the Christian may be adequate, equipped for every good work. The word artios (artios) is defined as follows:

"complete, capable, proficient, able to meet all demands."2
"complete, perfect of its kind, suitable, exactly fitted"3
"complete, perfect. 2a having reference apparently to "special aptitude for given uses."4

The Greek word for "equipped" is ejxhrtismevno" (exartismenos) and it means, "having been finished, fully equipped":

"equip, furnish."5
"to be thoroughly prepared or furnished."6
"to complete, finish. 1a to furnish perfectly. 1b to finish, accomplish."7

What about correcting error

Is there any place in Scripture where Jesus or the apostles appealed to tradition in order to refute error? We know of no occurrence whatsoever. However, Scripture was repeatedly used. If the Scriptures are sufficient, and thoroughly able to equip us for every good work, then we would not expect tradition to be consulted when correcting error. We would expect exactly what we find, the appeal to the Word of God as the standard by which truth is declared and error is exposed.

Acts 17:2-3, "And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ."
Acts 17:11, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so."
Rom. 4:2-3, "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about; but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
It is not tradition that is appealed to in refutation of error, but God's word.

Burden of proof is on the Catholics

Finally, if the Roman Catholic wants to say we need sacred tradition in order to be properly equipped doctrinally and spiritually, then he must establish that the Bible is not sufficient for teaching, or proof, correction, and training in righteousness -- and doctrinal issues.

For a full an concise teaching on why Scripture is suffient goto
http://carm.org/are-scriptures-sufficient

I have studied this for many years for all you anti-paste people it saves typing time.

God bless
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

#422304 Feb 13, 2013
Catholic Girl wrote:
You know, one doesn't have to keep posting this stuff. The book is call the bible, pick it up yourself and read it.
why depend on these non creditentials people to influence you.
no wonder satan has it easy.
http://carm.org/did-mary-have-other-children

I guess what you are saying is all the bible writers/contributors are wrong?



concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#422305 Feb 13, 2013
further to above clay

Acts 17:11 (NASB95)
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

1 Corinthians 4:6 (NASB95)
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.

So we must ask the RCC why?

Matthew 15:3 (NASB95)
3 And He answered and said to them,“Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

BTW

Just so you know How I know Paul's writings are scripture and thus over 2/3 of the NT with out needing a false RCC

2Pe 3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
2Pe 3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

An apostle of God Peter no less recognizes Paul's writings as scripture
truth

Perth, Australia

#422306 Feb 13, 2013
Who is that john LTM?
Which evil stay on my way?
LTM

Fort Frances, Canada

#422307 Feb 13, 2013
Catholic Girl wrote:
You know, one doesn't have to keep posting this stuff. The book is call the bible, pick it up yourself and read it.
why depend on these non creditentials people to influence you.
no wonder satan has it easy.
-----WHAT'S THAT---

Was that the pot calling the kettle black???
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#422308 Feb 13, 2013
Catholic Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
How do you know it isn't true? Knowing of what I know of previously known as Cardinal Eugene Pascelli, whom you call Pope Pius XII there was much study donw on his part.
This is easy

1 Corinthians 4:6 (NASB95)
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.

Pope whatever declared something that goes beyond what is written in scripture. He has contradicted scripture for the sake of Tradition.

So we must ask the RCC why?

Matthew 15:3 (NASB95)
3 And He answered and said to them,“Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

#422309 Feb 13, 2013
Texas church to host concealed handgun training class

Published February 10, 2013

Associated Press

DUMAS, Texas – A Baptist church in the Texas Panhandle plans to host concealed handgun training, saying it's offering the class as a community service because there is so much interest in the area.

People wanting to get a concealed handgun license in Texas must take the class. The Rev. Brad Foster of Calvary Baptist Church in Dumas told the Amarillo Globe-News for a story in Saturday's editions that a state-certified instructor will teach the first 10-hour class in the fellowship hall March 2. It covers how to safely handle firearms.

"We've always attempted to think outside the box as far as what the needs of the community are, and I think this melds well with that philosophy," he said.

Two more classes are planned and the church will offer more if there's still interest. Foster said people from across the region, not just church members, have expressed interest in the training. More than half of those enrolled are women and some are teachers.

Jim Edlin, the church's Sunday school director and an organizer of the class, said he looks forward to sharing his experience in the class with others in the community.

"It'll make people feel more secure about where they are, and hopefully the more people get the license the safer we'll all be," he said.

Foster said there has been little negative feedback about the church hosting the class.

"One concern was expressed that this is a political hot-button, especially in our nation, and I certainly am sensitive to that reality," he said. "However, we're not making a political statement, except we don't mind being associated with being in support of the Second Amendment."

Dumas is about 50 miles north of Amarillo.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/10/texas-ch...
Clay

Chicago, IL

#422310 Feb 13, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
2 Tim. 3:16-17, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."
17 he explains that this is so the Christian may be adequate, equipped for every good work. The word artios (artios) is defined as follows:
"complete, capable, proficient, able to meet all demands."2
"complete, perfect of its kind, suitable, exactly fitted"3
"complete, perfect. 2a having reference apparently to "special aptitude for given uses."4
The Greek word for "equipped" is ejxhrtismevno" (exartismenos) and it means, "having been finished, fully equipped":
"equip, furnish."5
"to be thoroughly prepared or furnished."6
"to complete, finish. 1a to furnish perfectly. 1b to finish, accomplish."7
What about correcting error
Is there any place in Scripture where Jesus or the apostles appealed to tradition in order to refute error? We know of no occurrence whatsoever. However, Scripture was repeatedly used. If the Scriptures are sufficient, and thoroughly able to equip us for every good work, then we would not expect tradition to be consulted when correcting error. We would expect exactly what we find, the appeal to the Word of God as the standard by which truth is declared and error is exposed.
Acts 17:2-3, "And according to Paul’s custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ."
Acts 17:11, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so."
Rom. 4:2-3, "For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about; but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
It is not tradition that is appealed to in refutation of error, but God's word.
Burden of proof is on the Catholics
Finally, if the Roman Catholic wants to say we need sacred tradition in order to be properly equipped doctrinally and spiritually, then he must establish that the Bible is not sufficient for teaching, or proof, correction, and training in righteousness -- and doctrinal issues.
For a full an concise teaching on why Scripture is suffient goto
http://carm.org/are-scriptures-sufficient
I have studied this for many years for all you anti-paste people it saves typing time.
God bless
As I'm sure you're aware (but probably convinced yourself otherwise) that Pauls letter to Timothy was telling him that scripture is profitable for teaching...
The scripture Paul was referring to would be the Hebrew Books the Apostles considered scripture. It would not have been his letter Timothy was reading. Nor would it have been future letters or Johns Revelation - which came at a later date.
Even so, Paul did NOT say scripture is the ONLY thing. You guys said this 1600 yrs later.
In fact Paul says the exact opposite in his letter to the Thessalonians "Hold steadfast to your traditions, taught to you by word of mouth AND letter" 2Thess 2:15

Any mention of scripture in the New Testament by the Apostles is always referring to the OT.

Since: Nov 08

usa

#422311 Feb 13, 2013
Catholic Girl wrote:
Seems the non-believers here, believe only what the tune is that they dance to. They seem to believe in only what they pick and choose to believe and not the Holy Spirit.
All those made up churches with their pastors seem to have no leadership of their church. They just preach and preach what they want to preach and what they seem to believe in at the time.
Can not believe people actually follow these people. Yet call a well established and well studied religion hog wash.???
Trust in God.
made up churches? you are including the catholic church as well as the others right? if not,that would be unfair,the c.c. is a man made up church (pagan/christian) just like the rest,they were just the first,pagan rome worshiped the sun as a god, guess on what date? tick tick tick tick tick tick tick,times up,the exact same day jesus was born according to the early church fathers,coincedence or what? every date used by the c.c. just happens to coincide with paganism,the odds of that happening are so high it's astronomical,beyond belief,it would make the odds of hitting the lottery seem like a 2 to 1 bet. i would call "hog wash" accurate.
Saban fan

United States

#422312 Feb 13, 2013
LTM wrote:
<quoted text>
Why doesn't he speak directly to God?? I do.
how can he be the leader of God's Church and not talk to God.
Do you people even understand the importance of talking to God; and having a personal relationship with Him.
This is so sad, Dan
You caught ol' Dan with his boot in mouth.
Clay

Chicago, IL

#422313 Feb 13, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
further to above clay
Acts 17:11 (NASB95)
11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.
1 Corinthians 4:6 (NASB95)
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.
So we must ask the RCC why?
Matthew 15:3 (NASB95)
3 And He answered and said to them,“Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?
BTW
Just so you know How I know Paul's writings are scripture and thus over 2/3 of the NT with out needing a false RCC
2Pe 3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
2Pe 3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
An apostle of God Peter no less recognizes Paul's writings as scripture
You've yet so show me where the Apostles say scripture is the ONLY thing. You got that? The only thing...not profitable; not good for teachings.. The Catholic Church couldn't agree more that scripture is profitable and good for teaching.

You're an Ideologue. A conspiracy Christian. Your opinion on what the Apostles taught mean nothing because you're not an authority on the teachings. They already revealed the faith to the Church a long long time ago. You and your team are way to late to come along and say "wait, they meant this they meant that...or everyone misunderstood for 1800 yrs.
truth

Perth, Australia

#422314 Feb 13, 2013
evil upon evil upon evil liars upon liars
nothing to do with real Creator.
not at all
truth

Perth, Australia

#422315 Feb 13, 2013
your law is not my law
Scribe Pharisee this and that evil upon evil liars upon liars
byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Since: Nov 08

usa

#422316 Feb 13, 2013
Saban fan wrote:
What the Bible says about the Catholic Church
http://apologeticspress.org/pdfs/e-books_pdf/...
interesting site in the introduction alone i found this:Today many people, without knowing or considering
the past, raise the flag of Catholicism and defend it “to
the hilt.” Others answer inquiries about their Catholic
faith by saying that it is the religion of their parents, in
which they were born, and it is the one in which they will
stay until death. But they overlook the important fact
that this religion was forced upon their ancestors..........this is very truthful and accurate, it can be corroborated.
Saban fan

United States

#422317 Feb 13, 2013
LTM wrote:
"Does the Bible record the death of the apostles? How did each of the apostles die?"
Answer: The only apostle whose death the Bible records is James (Acts 12:2). King Herod had James “put to death with the sword,” likely a reference to beheading. The circumstances of the deaths of the other apostles are related through church tradition, so we should not put too much weight on any of the other accounts. The most commonly accepted church tradition in regard to the death of an apostle is that the apostle Peter was crucified upside-down on an x-shaped cross in Rome in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (John 21:18). The following are the most popular “traditions” concerning the deaths of the other apostles:
Matthew suffered martyrdom in Ethiopia, killed by a sword wound. John faced martyrdom when he was boiled in a huge basin of boiling oil during a wave of persecution in Rome. However, he was miraculously delivered from death. John was then sentenced to the mines on the prison island of Patmos. He wrote his prophetic book of Revelation on Patmos. The apostle John was later freed and returned to what is now modern-day Turkey. He died as an old man, the only apostle to die peacefully.
James, the brother of Jesus (not officially an apostle), was the leader of the church in Jerusalem. He was thrown from the southeast pinnacle of the temple (over a hundred feet down) when he refused to deny his faith in Christ. When they discovered that he survived the fall, his enemies beat James to death with a club. This is thought to be the same pinnacle where Satan had taken Jesus during the temptation.
Bartholomew, also known as Nathanael, was a missionary to Asia. He witnessed in present-day Turkey and was martyred for his preaching in Armenia, being flayed to death by a whip. Andrew was crucified on an x-shaped cross in Greece. After being whipped severely by seven soldiers, they tied his body to the cross with cords to prolong his agony. His followers reported that when he was led toward the cross, Andrew saluted it in these words:“I have long desired and expected this happy hour. The cross has been consecrated by the body of Christ hanging on it.” He continued to preach to his tormentors for two days until he died. The apostle Thomas was stabbed with a spear in India during one of his missionary trips to establish the church there. Matthias, the apostle chosen to replace the traitor Judas Iscariot, was stoned and then beheaded. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor Nero in Rome in A.D. 67. There are traditions regarding the other apostles as well, but none with any reliable historical or traditional support.
It is not so important how the apostles died. What is important is the fact that they were all willing to die for their faith. If Jesus had not been resurrected, the disciples would have known it. People will not die for something they know to be a lie. The fact that all of the apostles were willing to die horrible deaths, refusing to renounce their faith in Christ, is tremendous evidence that they had truly witnessed the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
from gotquestions.org
That is what convinced me to become a Christian. Look at Peter's example before Christ's resurrection and his example afterwards. They denied him and fled from him and were frightened before Christ's death but afterwards they had NO FEAR! They saw something AMAZING - Jesus resurrected! And, if Jesus rose from the dead and has no grave He is who He says He is - the Son of God..........

We would be discussing him had he not risen from the grave and completely convinced those men.

Good stuff! I wish the 'Prove there is a God' thread could get it.
Clay

Chicago, IL

#422318 Feb 13, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
further to above clay
An apostle of God Peter no less recognizes Paul's writings as scripture
No he does not. He calls Pauls writings 'letters' a couple times, then -with a little word play - you weakly could make the argument he implies 'scripture' when he says 'other scripture'.

If you say Peter thought Pauls writings were scripture, I would ask you what you thought about Pauls other letters that did not make the Biblical cut or were lost? If Paul automatically wrote scripture simply by writing, then the Bible is incomplete because we do not have the other 'scriptural' writings from Paul.

Also, at the time of this letter, there were a number of books not yet written (Jude, Hebrews, John 1,2, and 3, Revelation and Matthew)

Pretty though to be a sola scripturalist when you ain't got all the scripture??

Since: Nov 08

usa

#422319 Feb 13, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
YES--One Heavenly Father with Jesus Christ (His Son) as His (temporary) Earthly Representative (until His ascention) and appointing Peter as His earthly Representative to lead HIS Church until He (Jesus returns for the second time)
YES---and He gave us HIS "One True Church" in Matthew 16:13-21, the same Church that is referred to over 30 times in the New Testament:-----NOT 42,000 CONTRADICTING PROTESTANT (HODGE-PODGE OF PERSONAL OPINIONS The same One True Church which began at Antioch:(Acts 2) The same Church that that Paul refers to in His letters to the Churches in Ephesis, Corinth, Thessalonica, Colosses, Philippi, Galatia and on and on! NOT 42,000 INCONSISTENT PROTESTANT DENOMINATIONS OF RELATIVE TRUTH----The same One True Church that has Bishops, priests, deacons and elders (Acts 2 -again): The same One True Church that is authoritative, visible and heirarchical (Acts 2) NOT 42,000 CONFLICTING SELF INTERPRETATIONS OF THE BIBLE
YES---and He gave us His One TRUE Body and Blood in the Eucharist (John 6:47-59)---"the spoken, stated and expressed words of Jesus Christ HIMSELF":------NOT WORDS FROM SOME "SELF APPOINTED HERETICAL PREACHER" WHO MIS=QUOTES, MIS-INTERPRETS AND MIS-USES the TRUE INTERPRETAION of Gods Word to "appease and satisfy his vengeance and hostility" against Jesus Christ HIMSELF and His (historically and biblically PROVEN One TRUE Apostolic Catholic Church. God "never has" nor "ever will be" the author of your bible only Protestant "confusion, chaos and heresy"!!
HOJO:One True Church which began at Antioch..JETHRO:read the history of the church of antioch and you'll find it "WAS" a christian church until rome invaded and handed the church over to their man made church the C.C., the church of antioch is a prisoner of the catholic church just like the people that were forced into following the church or be crucified.

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.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Wed Jesus saves 8,717
Pope challenges Muslims to condemn violence Tue Jeff Brightone 1
What Divides Catholics and Protestants? (Apr '08) Tue USA Born 83,901
Pope's role in Cuba deal fractures Cuban-Americ... Tue woodtick57 4
Cuba Deal Is Major Victory for Pope's Diplomati... Dec 22 John 4
Vatican signals new tone on US nuns Dec 21 Raymond F Rice 2
Pope plays key role in Cuba-US policy shift Dec 21 Doc Proper 12
More from around the web