Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.

Comments (Page 20,630)

Showing posts 412,581 - 412,600 of512,080
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
MICHAEL

Hamilton, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427945
Mar 15, 2013
 
Oxbow wrote:
879 833 698
<quoted text>
Just being courteous...would you rather I be discourteous????
I am just teasing you. We all need to lighten a little.

Thanks for reading my post.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427946
Mar 15, 2013
 
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
The bible IS the Word of God, and the Bible also teaches that it IS the Word of God but it is also teaches that it is NOT the final authority. Paul tells us in 1 Timothy 3:15 that the Church (not the bible only is the pinnacle, pillar and foundation of the TRUTH The bible also teaches that the Apostolic tradition IS the Word of God, as well.... 2 Thess 2:15 teaches us that we are to obey and "hold fast" to the Tradition,whether by word of mouth or the letter. This tradition is different than the traditions of men that Jesus condemned. We are to obey Apostolic Tradition and reject human traditions that void Gods Word. The Apostolic Traditions are the oral teachings of Jesus Christ that He handed on to His Apostles and the teachings of the Apostles were dictated to them by the Holy Spirit (again) The Bible is the Word of God, but it is NOT the only authority for Christians1 It can't be--because it CANNOT interpret itself! The Bible directs us to an authority "outside of itself" to understand what it actually means. This is why Catholics have the greatest love for Sacred Scripture. The Early Church Fathers, from the very beginning, when the Canon of Scripture was formed in 382,393, and 397AD, wanted to insure that the bible was properly interpreted and not abused with false and heretical interpretation, that TODAY, continue to divide the body of Christ. The Catholic Church wrote, translated, copied and preserved Gods written word for over 2000 years throughout the ages. The Catholic Church does not interpret the scriptures for us. We read it, ponder its meaning, interpret, and clarify its TRUE Meaning. The Church does direct us to the TRUTH of what the bible actually says, means, its purpose, its intention and its true translation which came from (again) the Early Church Fathers.
Again--this is why Paul, in I Timothy 3:15 says "The Church (not the bible alone) is the Pillar, pinnacle and foundation of the TRUTH. The Church (Jesus' One True Church) remains as it has for over 2000 years--The FULLNESS of that TRUTH!!
I got it now.....you have this already prepared in a Word document for ease fo copying and pasting, and haven't figured out how to express your own thoughts, huh?

It happens to the best of Catholics at some point in their life.
guest

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427947
Mar 15, 2013
 
guest wrote:
Funny - how you first say ignore non-Christian texts and then refer to the Qur'an ... a non-Christian text... whatever!
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
To clarify what I posted - NOT OUT OF CONTEXT - so please stop trying to twist it around Catholic.
"non-Christian text"
- can be all non-canonical texts written with Christians in mind. You chose to disregard, again, all of what Jesus taught. So with you twisting my words around, I can see you blatantly want to mislead tohers with my posts. Please stop. Take a reading comprehension course to better yourself and understand the forum discussions.
- can also be non-Christian texts like the Q'uran, from other non-Christian religion.
Of course you immediately disregard anythign to do with Jesus, "because in your world", you enjoy and find comfort in believing what other men told you to believe.
Grow-up and stop back-peddling. Act like an adult if you want to play with the adults.
-
Back pedaling? you have yet to read and comprehend what I've written, and you say I am backpedaling and need a reading comprehension course? How utterly unsophisticated of you. people know what you are doing and have been doing, and that is EXACTLY WHAT YOU ACCUSE OTHERS OF. Misrepresenting what we have said. go figure.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427948
Mar 15, 2013
 
socci wrote:
<quoted text>
yea, umm,*sigh*
Im aware what the textbooks say. Others disagree.
The entire fossil record was due to the global flood.
homo erectus never existed. There is no evidence for the thing (i.e.'peking man')
Neanderthal was just a race of man.
http://archive.org/details/NeanderthalCaveman...
"Now we've said our A-B-Cs next time wont you join with me!"
"The entire fossil record was due to the global flood."

Incorrect. Many fossils have been dated prior to 65 million years ago, which clearly outdates a belief of a "6000 year old Earth".

What you say, would make the "Global Flood" much older than what the Bible deems as your belief. Thus, this would make the Bible invalid.
7th Day Catholic Rocks

Poplar Bluff, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427949
Mar 15, 2013
 
Oxbow wrote:
792 494 414
<quoted text>
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
overshadow: episkiazo:, to cast a shade upon, i.e.(by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy; figuratively, to invest with preternatural influence:--overshadow.
With all due respect, I don't see one thing about "sperm" nor "seed"..nor artifical insemination......do you????
Genesis 3:15

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel

Woman has an egg so there was a seed planted in her from somewhere right ?
socci

El Dorado Springs, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427950
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
Incorrect. Many fossils have been dated prior to 65 million years ago, which clearly outdates a belief of a "6000 year old Earth".
What you say, would make the "Global Flood" much older than what the Bible deems as your belief. Thus, this would make the Bible invalid.

Im aware of the theory. What proof do you have?

Is this just more of your new age deception? No wonder you are so confused about God.

Yet another victim of the state.
socci

El Dorado Springs, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427951
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
1. I am not your "personal Jesus".
2. As for reliability - good question. Since no one can prove the 10 Commandments exist, you are at a point that does cause this questioning. But don't worry, the dismay passes, once you see the astonishment that Jesus predicted.
(2) Jesus says:
(1) "The one who seeks should not cease seeking until he finds.
(2) And when he finds, he will be dismayed.
(3) And when he is dismayed, he will be astonished.
(4) And he will be king over the All."
http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gth_pat_rob.htm

Like anything else in history destroyed by war we look to the witnesses at the time. The ten commandments were witnessed by many as recorded in the Bible. The Exodus artifacts have been found as the Bible says.

There's no truth in gnosticism which takes Bible truth and spins a lie. Catholic gnosticism was the first taking Mary the mother of Jesus transforming her into their tradition copycat of Semiramis. The real Christian trinity does not include Mary / virgin mary.
truth

Perth, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427952
Mar 15, 2013
 
what others try set up nobody will except..
weed seed is always weed..right..
LTM

Sudbury, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427953
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

"What is the doctrine of eternal Sonship and is it biblical?"

Answer: The doctrine of eternal Sonship simply affirms that the second Person of the triune Godhead has eternally existed as the Son. In other words, there was never a time when He was not the Son of God, and there has always been a Father/Son relationship within the Godhead. This doctrine recognizes that the idea of Sonship is not merely a title or role that Christ assumed at some specific point in history, but that it is the essential identity of the second Person of the Godhead. According to this doctrine, Christ is and always has been the Son of God.

Yes, the eternal Sonship is biblical and is a view that is widely held among Christians and has been throughout church history. It is important, however, to remember when discussing the doctrine of eternal Sonship that there are evangelical Christians on both sides of this debate. This is not to say that this is not an important doctrine, because it is; it simply acknowledges the fact that there are orthodox or evangelical Christians that hold or have held both views. Those that deny the doctrine of eternal Sonship are not denying the triune nature of God or the deity or eternality of Christ, and those that embrace the eternal Sonship of Christ are not inferring that Jesus Christ was anything less than fully God.

Throughout church history the doctrine of eternal Sonship has been widely held, with most Christians believing that Jesus existed as God’s eternal Son before creation. It is affirmed in the Nicene Creed (325 A.D.) which states: "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end." It was also later reaffirmed in the fifth century in the Athanasian Creed.

There is considerable biblical evidence to support the eternal Sonship of Christ. First of all, there are many passages that clearly identify that it was “the Son” who created all things (Colossians 1:13-16; Hebrews 1:2), thereby strongly implying that Christ was the Son of God at the time of creation. When one considers these passages, it seems clear that the most normal and natural meaning of the passages is that at the time of creation Jesus was the Son of God, the second Person of the Triune Godhead, thus supporting the doctrine of eternal Sonship.

cont
truth

Perth, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427954
Mar 15, 2013
 
people working in soilence prepeare thrmself for 50 years on front much more..you what you doing nothing..
i need go again see proper position what they prepeare whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

i know whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
they want control much more medern then you know or think
o yes yes yes they know whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
cmockkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
holy spirit
will lead you
me no i don't going do nothing wrong..nothing against anyone..i am not interesting about any person..not at all..i am looking what others did not know but they working against me in my name..
its not meeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
by almightyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyy
will be what i know not others krukovici

I wish you all the best.
LTM

Sudbury, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427955
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

cont
Second, there are numerous verses that speak of God the Father sending the Son into the world to redeem sinful man (John 20:21; Galatians 4:4; 1 John 4:14; 1 John 4:10) and giving His Son as a sacrifice for sin (John 3:16). Clearly implied in all the passages that deal with the Father sending/giving the Son is the fact that He was the Son before He was sent into the world. This is even more clearly seen in Galatians 4:4-6, where the term “sent forth” is used both of the Son and the Spirit. Just as the Holy Spirit did not become the Holy Spirit when He was sent to empower the believers at Pentecost, neither did the Son become the Son at the moment of His incarnation. All three Persons of the Triune Godhead have existed for all eternity, and their names reveal who they are, not simply what their title or function is.

cont
LTM

Sudbury, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427956
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

cont
Third, 1 John 3:8 speaks of the appearance or manifestation of the Son of God:“the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil.” The verb “to make manifest” or “appeared” means to make visible or to bring to light something that was previously hidden. The idea communicated in this verse is not that the second Person of the trinity became the Son of God, but that the already existing Son of God was made manifest or appeared in order to fulfill God’s predetermined purpose. This idea is also seen in other verses such as John 11:27 and 1 John 5:20.
Fourth, Hebrews 13:8 teaches that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yes and forever.” This verse again seems to support the doctrine of eternal Sonship. The fact that Jesus’ divine nature is unchanging would seem to indicate that He was always the Son of God because that is an essential part of His Person. At the incarnation Jesus took on human flesh, but His divine nature did not change, nor did His relationship with the Father. This same truth is also implied in John 20:31, where we see John’s purpose in writing his gospel was so that we might “believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.” It does not say that He became the Son of God but that He is the Son of God. The fact that Jesus was and is the Son of God is an essential aspect of Who He is and His work in redemption.
Finally, one of the strongest evidences for the eternal Sonship of Christ is the triune nature of God and the eternal relationship that exists among the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Particularly important is the unique Father/Son relationship that can only be understood from the aspect of Christ’s eternal Sonship. This relationship is key to understanding the full measure of God’s love for those whom He redeems through the blood of Christ. The fact that God the Father took His Son, the very Son He loved from before the foundation of the world, and sent Him to be a sacrifice for our sins is an amazing act of grace and love that is best understood from the doctrine of eternal Sonship.
One verse that speaks of the eternal relationship between the Father and Son is John 16:28. "I came forth from the Father, and have come into the world; I am leaving the world again, and going to the Father." Implied in this verse is again the fact that the Father/Son relationship between God the Father and God the Son is one that always has and always will exist. At His incarnation the Son “came from the Father” in the same sense as upon His resurrection He returned “to the Father.” Implied in this verse is the fact that if Jesus was the Son after the resurrection, then He was also the Son prior to His incarnation. Other verses that support the eternal Sonship of Christ would include John 17:5 and John 17:24, which speak of the Father’s love for the Son from “before the foundation of the world.”
After one considers the many arguments for the doctrine of eternal Sonship, it should become clear that this is indeed a biblical doctrine that finds much support in Scripture. However, that is not to imply that arguments cannot be made against the doctrine as well, or that all Christians will agree to this doctrine. While it has been the view of the majority of Christian commentators throughout history, there have been several prominent Christians on the other side of the issue as well.
cont
LTM

Sudbury, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427957
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

cont
Those that deny the doctrine of eternal Sonship would instead hold to a view that is often referred to as the Incarnational Sonship, which teaches that while Christ preexisted, He was not always the Son of God. Those that hold this view believe Christ became the Son of God at some point in history, with the most common view being that Christ became the Son at His incarnation. However, there are others who believe Christ did not become the Son until sometime after His incarnation, such as at His baptism, His resurrection, or His exaltation. It is important to realize that those who deny the eternal Sonship of Christ still recognize and affirm His deity and His eternality.
Those who hold this view see the Sonship of Christ as not being an essential part of Who He is, but instead see it as simply being a role or a title or function that Christ assumed at His incarnation. They also teach that the Father became the Father at the time of the incarnation. Throughout history many conservative Christians have denied the doctrine of eternal Sonship. Some examples would include Ralph Wardlaw, Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes, Finis J. Dake, Walter Martin, and at one time John MacArthur. It is important to note, however, that several years ago John MacArthur changed his position on this doctrine and he now affirms the doctrine of eternal Sonship.
One of the verses commonly used to support Incarnational Sonship is Hebrews 1:5, which appears to speak of God the Father’s begetting of God the Son as an event that takes place at a specific point in time:“Thou art My Son, Today I have begotten Thee. And again. I will be a Father to Him. And He shall be a Son to Me.” Those who hold to the doctrine of incarnational Sonship point out two important aspects of this verse. 1—that “begetting” normally speaks of a person’s origin, and 2—that a Son is normally subordinate to his father. They reject the doctrine of eternal Sonship in an attempt to preserve the perfect equality and eternality of the Persons of the Triune Godhead. In order to do so, they must conclude that “Son” is simply a title or function that Christ took on at His incarnation and that “Sonship” refers to the voluntary submission that Christ took to the Father at His incarnation (Philippians 2:5-8; John 5:19).
Some of the problems with the Incarnational Sonship of Christ are that this teaching confuses or destroys the internal relationships that exist within the Trinity, because if the Son is not eternally begotten by the Father, then neither did the Spirit eternally proceed from the Father through the Son. Also, if there is no Son prior to the incarnation, then there is no Father either; and yet throughout the Old Testament we see God being referred to as the Father of Israel. Instead of having a triune God eternally existing in three distinct Persons with three distinct names, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, those who hold to the doctrine of incarnational Sonship end up with a nameless Trinity prior to the incarnation, and we would be forced to say that God has chosen not to reveal Himself as He truly is, but only as He was to become. In other words, instead of actually revealing who He is, the Triune God instead chose to reveal Himself by the titles He would assume or the roles that He would take on and not who He really is. This is dangerously close to modalism and could easily lead to false teachings about the nature of God. One of the weaknesses of the doctrine of incarnational Sonship is that the basic relationships existing among the members of the Trinity are confused and diminished. Taken to its logical conclusion, denying the eternal Sonship of Christ reduces the Trinity from the relationship of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to simply Number One, Number Two and Number Three Persons—with the numbers themselves being an arbitrary designation, destroying the God-given order and relationship that exists among the Persons of the Trinity.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427958
Mar 15, 2013
 
945 879 833 698
MICHAEL wrote:
<quoted text>
I am just teasing you. We all need to lighten a little.
Thanks for reading my post.
Thanks for saying that....it is very difficult, at times, to understand that someone is just teasing, in that, we don't hear what "tone of voice" is being intended, not hearing any voice inflection, nor any face expressions, etc etc...

Am willing to lighten up!!!!

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427959
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

who="MICHAEL"
If Canes wife was his sister, than that goes against all our own moral beliefs including the 10 commandments. What is the point in creating only 1 man and 1 woman if incest was the start of all of us?
Same with Mary and Joseph. The story claims Mary was very young, and Joseph was very old. My mother would not approve of a 40 something man dating my 15 year old sister.........another flawed moral teaching.

__________

Worldly people have mistreated the Bible in an attempt to destroy it. All Godly people are pictured in story books as toothless and shaggy headed. If they were cave-men, why are others well groomed, and in fancy houses? Joseph WAS NOT an old widower. Someone was trying to reason that no young man would marry a teen-ager who was pregnant.

What difference does it make that we don't know where Cain got his wife?

Don't let your bad experience with people turn you against God. THAT leaves you with THEM alone, and NO God! HE is the One Who is REAL.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427960
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

949 792 494 414
7th Day Catholic Rocks wrote:
<quoted text>Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel
Woman has an egg so there was a seed planted in her from somewhere right ?
In Ge 3:15 show me the word "egg"...

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427961
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

LTM: Those that deny the doctrine of eternal Sonship would instead hold to a view that is often referred to as the Incarnational Sonship, which teaches that while Christ preexisted, He was not always the Son of God. Those that hold this view believe Christ became the Son of God at some point in history, with the most common view being that Christ became the Son at His incarnation. However, there are others who believe Christ did not become the Son until sometime after His incarnation, such as at His baptism, His resurrection, or His exaltation. It is important to realize that those who deny the eternal Sonship of Christ still recognize and affirm His deity and His eternality.

________

God was/is eternal. Jesus said (John 17)that He and the Father are ONE. Jesus/God clothed Himself (His Word) in flesh so that He could reveal Himself to us. The flesh was not God...though He raised it to immortality to show us His plan for us. Colossians: Christ in you is YOUR HOPE OF GLORY.

“" THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH!"”

Since: Jun 10

"ISA 55:11--"MATT 10:27"

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427962
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

who="7th Day Catholic Rocks" Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel
Woman has an egg so there was a seed planted in her from somewhere right ?

__________

The MYSTERY of godliness is not ours to figure out. Things revealed belong to us, but those NOT revealed are His...not ours.
Come out of her MY people

Huntington Park, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427963
Mar 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

the Bible IS THE ONLY AUTHORITY. IF YOU DON'T READ IT AND OBEY IT YOU CAN WITHOUT A DOUBT KNOW YOU WILL BE IN HELL AND THE LAKE OF FIRE. 2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: Joh_14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Joh_1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,(and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.THE WORD IS IN THE BIBLE, NOT IN CATHOLICISM. PETER WAS NEVER A POPE, NEVER IN ROME AND HE WAS MARRIED. IT'S ALL IN THE BIBLE. WHEN JESUS SAVED ME HIS HOLY SPIRIT LED ME TO GET A KING JAMES BIBLE AND HE SAID THIS IS MY AUTHORITY!
Joh_10:1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
hojo

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#427964
Mar 15, 2013
 
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
I got it now.....you have this already prepared in a Word document for ease fo copying and pasting, and haven't figured out how to express your own thoughts, huh?
It happens to the best of Catholics at some point in their life.
Nope!! Wrong again as usual New Age! I don't need to copy and paste anything! It's called "AD-LIBBING ----the--- TRUTH!! Two words that have "escaped your vocabulary as well as your thinking!!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 412,581 - 412,600 of512,080
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••
•••