Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 685653 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.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#456633 Jun 26, 2013
persnickety wrote:
<quoted text>YOU have no idea what Pope John Paul II said or meant.
Knit and Pray..

I can read what He said.

What is sad is that you are cannonizing that saint...And then rewriting
His meaning .

He wanted us,all to stand together...But you insist that in order fir us to be fellow,Christians we must follow Catholic practice.

That is like the disciples who thought the Gentiles must be circumcised to follow Jesus

He acknowledged our. differences...while calling the non Catholics killed for being Christians. martyrs.

You call non Catholics Faux Christians..knit...Is that what the Pope meant???
Human Being

Ville Platte, LA

#456634 Jun 26, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
039
<quoted text>
Where does He say: And from this day forth, all newborn will have their soul stained with the original sin of Adam/Eve....or words to that affect...
Oxbow: In simplist terms Acquinas explain it:
So...this teaching of original sin did not come from God...but it is the teaching of Acquinas???????
Oxbow:

The truth about of original sin is reasoned. For all have sinned....Well, there must be a reason all people sin, they have sin-nature. Sin-nature is part of being human. God doesn't create human beings like he does angels. Therefore we carry sin, as part of our sin-nature.

So likewise, for you, God did not say in the Bible, that the Sun orbits around the Milky Way Galactic Center. So it must not be true? Neither in the Bible does God say, ducks quack. So for you they must not quack....

It is difficult for me to reason with you. It always has been.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#456635 Jun 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
One of these religions could give quite a thrill to their believers.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>
History of Religious Ideas, by Mircea Eliade.
Tibetan Religions
According to an ancient tradition, the White Light gave birth to an egg, from which emerged the primordial Man.
The lamas are masters of the atmosphere exactly like the shamans; they fly in the air, etc.
Religious fundamentalists "use" their deity to threaten and defame you(bash). That way they can remove themselves from the repercussions that result from the attack. They do not wish to have their nose punched, and it is impossible to break the legs of a deity that doesn't exist.
How convenient!
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#456636 Jun 26, 2013
OldJG wrote: So you are telling us what Luke and Paul wrote is a lie? Really? Should we get out a BIG BLACK "MAGIC MARKER" and draw huge black lines through these verses nobody can see or read them. Well, should we? Luke 22:19-20, 19 "And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." I Corinthians 11:23-26, 23 "For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 25 n the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes."
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
We accept Jesus at His word. You on the other hand take a black marker and insert "this SYMBOLIZES My body".
tonyBM said, quote, "We accept Jesus at His word. You on the other hand take a black marker and insert "this SYMBOLIZES My body". End quote.

This is very interesting. Was Jesus still alive when He spoke of Himself in John 6? If Jesus was alive, and He was, why didn't He hold up his finger, arm or leg when He said, "this is My body?" Why did Jesus hold up bread? Was the bread symbolic of something?

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#456637 Jun 26, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to get angry when Catholics say we're the true Church. Yet, you claim the Orthodox are the true ones. That's called a hypocrite.
I could care less if you believe the Orthodox are the true faith. I would expect nothing less. Why belong to a faith if you're not 100% convinced its the truth?
I don't think the Orthodox's argument against the Papacy holds any weight. Its clear Christ set His Church up with one leader. So it stands to reason the next generation would have one too.
why do you have to constantly LIE!!!

she never ever has said her church is the true church.

the FACTS speak for themselves. your church WAS the FIRST PROTESTANT church(BOY DO I HATE TO USE THAT WORD).

Gods Church is one of Holiness, you church has been so evil that God doesn't even wish to revisit it.

THAT IS HISTORY, clay.

WHY would any person wish to belong to your church?

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#456638 Jun 26, 2013
Human Being wrote:
<quoted text>
New Age Spiritual Leader:
I can't be quite sure on this, but it seems to me honesty goes to conscience, the more dishonest one is, the more their conscience is dark. But the light shines through the darkness regardless of one's honesty.
No it doesn't.
Pathological and sociopathic minds have no balance or recognition of "justice" or "conscience"...excep t what is predetermined in it's perversion that their insanity is correct behavior. They live in unrealistic "truths", and behave accordingly abnormal. This "insanity" can be induced...religion borders on this process of misinformation, and mind seduction.
Human Being

Ville Platte, LA

#456639 Jun 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
After a long search I found a post by Robert F, now posting as "Human being" written on the following thread Page 58.
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/T675JJ592...
Earlier on, Robert posted as a Catholic.
It was a short time after this that I left religion and became an Atheist.
How ironic that Robert is now again a Catholic who believes in a personal "god" and I am now an Atheist.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
As an afterthought Robert, I would like to know why you believe that "only" the Atheistic type of belief can be open minded and objective?
Atheism requires proof of all things. That to me, is NOT objective. It is subject to the need for proof. It does not rely at all on mystery.
I don't even believe as an Agnostic, but I believe that Agnostics are more objective than are Atheists. Agnostics leave the issues open-ended. Atheists demand proof ... and tangible proof is impossible to prove, in the issue of whether invisible spirit does, or does not exist.
I will await your reply, and thanks in advance.
Robert F's reply
It is hard to say....To me agnostics are weighed down with indecision, therefore no clear answers can be found, but are "eternally" befuddled by everything....This does not make them right or wrong, just a bit befuddled, or a lot....lol
As for atheists....for me its a bit more scientific in its approach. I could be swayed myself, as I live in a country that was more or less founded by deists, and I have a particular prejudice then, by culture, to be deistic in nature....And after a long search for a personal god I have come to realize that there is none.
June:

Good memory and patience in researching....All the way back to page 58!

I find your response interesting as well....

"As you and I have corresponded off and on since I first came on the forum, I have witnessed how your beliefs have changed from following your Catholic faith to now entertaining the idea that you are more of an Atheist in belief, than religious.

I give you credit for your ability to use your mental faculties to question.

You don't seem to allow fear of the unknown to govern what you believe.
Read more at http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/T675JJ592...

smiles....I guess you don't give me any more credit for thinking?

But, concerning that time in my life, I find it was necessary in the way God has dealt with me, to find my ideas, were (and are) pretty small and wrong concerning God. So I had find out the hard way, and deny myself, my own concepts about God, and become/believe, I am a so-called Atheist. To do away with my own learning, in order to start from scratch.

The question then remains, Why did I change?

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#456640 Jun 26, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to get angry when Catholics say we're the true Church. Yet, you claim the Orthodox are the true ones. That's called a hypocrite.
I could care less if you believe the Orthodox are the true faith. I would expect nothing less. Why belong to a faith if you're not 100% convinced its the truth?
I don't think the Orthodox's argument against the Papacy holds any weight. Its clear Christ set His Church up with one leader. So it stands to reason the next generation would have one too.
Wrong.I don't get angry at all. I feel that the catholic church from ALL ORTHODOX point of view is NOT the true church. And yes ALL Orthodox do believe that the Orthodox Church is the True Church.Now how is that being a hypocrite? Were do you get the idea that I don't believe in the Orthodox Faith? I don't believe in the catholic church and its claim to be the true church because its not.Christ set His Church up upon Peter's Faith NOT on Peter himself. The fact that you don't feel that the Orthodox's aurgument against the papacy holds any weight is simple to understand. That what makes you a catholic and me an Orthodox..

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#456641 Jun 26, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
That's always a great point from Atheist. Why doesn't God heel an amputee? I dunno. I would be curious to know what a Bishop of the Catholic Church would say about this. Hopefully I can ask Him someday.
Let me ask you this: If the One God (the Abrahamic Muslim, Jew and Christian God) The only God; healed an amputee tonight on CNN, would you suddenly accept Him? I bet you wouldn't based on political and ideological differences.
I am only an atheist according to your heretic abrahamic religion.
Your deity will never actually "heal" anyone. It can't-It doesn't exist. Are you suggesting some silly setup such as Benny Hinn? LOL!
If your deity grew an amputee his limb back in public, I would certainly reconsider all that I have learned about the falsity of your deity, but not your church.
You shouldn't present unrealistic hypothetical possibilities about your deity as any possibility of the actuality of it's existence. It just makes your story even more unbelievable to any rational thinking persons.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456642 Jun 26, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
Why all the commentary, isn't the bible good enough for you?
Glad to help:

1 Chronicles 11:19 is Scripture found in the Bible!!!! Honest....
OldJG

Rockford, IL

#456643 Jun 26, 2013
What does it mean when Jesus says you must eat my body and drink my blood?

The passage in question is in John 6.

John 6:53-56, 53 ôSo Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

First, consider what this DOES NOT mean....
1.It is not a command for the Jews to kill Jesus so they can, as cannibals, eat His flesh and drink His blood.
2.Neither does it refer to the Lord's Supper--called by Roman Catholics the eucharist.

Secondly, let's look at the reasons it DOES NOT refer to the taking of the bread and fruit of the vine in the Lord's Supper.....
1.To eat the flesh of Christ and to drink His blood in a literal way would make those who did it cannibals. This would be wicked.
2.The drinking of blood is forbidden throughout the Bible. See Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 7:26, ; Leviticus 17:10-14, Acts 15:28-29. As seen in the Acts passage, even the Gentile Christians after the resurrection of Christ were to abstain from eating blood. If Christ was asking believers to eat His flesh and blood, He would be going against the clear teaching of scripture in numerous places.

Thirdly, in the passage in John 6, Christ clearly told them that He was speaking in a spiritual and not a literal sense. Verse 63 states, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." Here, He tells them that the flesh profits nothing and that He is referring to the spirit and not to the flesh.

What the passage is saying is that we must spiritually partake of the flesh and blood of Christ in order to have eternal life.

In Hebrews 3:14, believers are "made partakers of Christ." In Ephesians 3:6, we are "partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel." To partake is to take of something as in eating.

Here, we partake of the promise in Christ by means of the gospel. The gospel is the good news of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for the sake of sinners in order to provide them the offer of salvation. We partake of Christ by trusting in Him.

Consider these parallel passages in John 6: John 6:47, "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life." John 6:54, "Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

These verses are close to one another. The first states that everlasting life is obtained by believing in Jesus. The second states that eternal life (or everlasting life) is obtained by eating the flesh of Christ and drinking His blood. Therefore, to eat His flesh and to drink His blood means to believe on Him.

Salvation involves us being uniquely identified with Christ in both His death and His resurrection. It is no more difficult to think of our selves as eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ than it is to think of ourselves as being "baptized into his death" (Romans 6:3 ), "buried with him" (Romans 6:4), and "in the likeness of his resurrection" (Romans 6:5).

In reality, we are saved by eating of His holy life and drinking His incorruptible blood (1 Peter 1:18-19). But this is a spiritual truth and is not something that we must try to do physically. The real question is whether or not you have truly believed in the Lord.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#456644 Jun 26, 2013
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
And the opposite becomes true as we fall into the new "Faith"
SECUL AT HUMAN I AM..LEss Justice ..more violence...No moral compass to hold onto..
God has used us to Spread His word around. The World.
How sad He must be as this country is,slowly turning away from Him as,a nation
Which is why it is. Foolish for,CHristians to argue about my church is better than your church ..rather than joining. Together ..
An army of Christians flying the standard of truth.....
It's foolish and we will regret it..imo
All of the COMMUNIY OF CHRIST had a hand this nation's being a beacon .
Your church is losing it's appeal because of it's bigotry and hatred. It is evidenced right on this thread.
People are sick of your ridiculous threats against their well being, and young adults do not want any part of your dispicability.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456645 Jun 26, 2013
049
Human Being wrote:
<quoted text>
Oxbow:
The truth about of original sin is reasoned. For all have sinned....Well, there must be a reason all people sin, they have sin-nature. Sin-nature is part of being human. God doesn't create human beings like he does angels. Therefore we carry sin, as part of our sin-nature.
So likewise, for you, God did not say in the Bible, that the Sun orbits around the Milky Way Galactic Center. So it must not be true? Neither in the Bible does God say, ducks quack. So for you they must not quack....
It is difficult for me to reason with you. It always has been.
Answer the question or go wash that egg off your face....

So...this teaching of original sin did not come from God...but it is the teaching of Acquinas???????
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#456646 Jun 26, 2013
OldJG wrote:
OldJG wrote: So you are telling us what Luke and Paul wrote is a lie? Really? Should we get out a BIG BLACK "MAGIC MARKER" and draw huge black lines through these verses nobody can see or read them. Well, should we? Luke 22:19-20, 19 "And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood." I Corinthians 11:23-26, 23 "For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." 25 n the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes."
<quoted text>
tonyBM said, quote, "We accept Jesus at His word. You on the other hand take a black marker and insert "this SYMBOLIZES My body". End quote.
This is very interesting. Was Jesus still alive when He spoke of Himself in John 6? If Jesus was alive, and He was, why didn't He hold up his finger, arm or leg when He said, "this is My body?" Why did Jesus hold up bread? Was the bread symbolic of something?
There are plenty of words in Greek and Aramaic for the words symbolic and figurative. It's not there .

I guess you're not really bible alone are you?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456647 Jun 26, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
We accept Jesus at His word. You on the other hand take a black marker and insert "this SYMBOLIZES My body".
"Eucharist" is an invention of Catholics......

Recalling these words of Jesus, the Catholic Church professes that, in the celebration of the Eucharist, bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit and the instrumentality of the priest.

The truth is:
The Lord's Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members of the church, through partaking of the bread and the fruit of the vine, memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His second coming.
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#456648 Jun 26, 2013
OldJG wrote:
What does it mean when Jesus says you must eat my body and drink my blood?
The passage in question is in John 6.
John 6:53-56, 53 ôSo Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.
First, consider what this DOES NOT mean....
1.It is not a command for the Jews to kill Jesus so they can, as cannibals, eat His flesh and drink His blood.
2.Neither does it refer to the Lord's Supper--called by Roman Catholics the eucharist.
Secondly, let's look at the reasons it DOES NOT refer to the taking of the bread and fruit of the vine in the Lord's Supper.....
1.To eat the flesh of Christ and to drink His blood in a literal way would make those who did it cannibals. This would be wicked.
2.The drinking of blood is forbidden throughout the Bible. See Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 7:26, ; Leviticus 17:10-14, Acts 15:28-29. As seen in the Acts passage, even the Gentile Christians after the resurrection of Christ were to abstain from eating blood. If Christ was asking believers to eat His flesh and blood, He would be going against the clear teaching of scripture in numerous places.
Thirdly, in the passage in John 6, Christ clearly told them that He was speaking in a spiritual and not a literal sense. Verse 63 states, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." Here, He tells them that the flesh profits nothing and that He is referring to the spirit and not to the flesh.
What the passage is saying is that we must spiritually partake of the flesh and blood of Christ in order to have eternal life.
In Hebrews 3:14, believers are "made partakers of Christ." In Ephesians 3:6, we are "partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel." To partake is to take of something as in eating.
Here, we partake of the promise in Christ by means of the gospel. The gospel is the good news of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for the sake of sinners in order to provide them the offer of salvation. We partake of Christ by trusting in Him.
Consider these parallel passages in John 6: John 6:47, "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life." John 6:54, "Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
These verses are close to one another. The first states that everlasting life is obtained by believing in Jesus. The second states that eternal life (or everlasting life) is obtained by eating the flesh of Christ and drinking His blood. Therefore, to eat His flesh and to drink His blood means to believe on Him.
Salvation involves us being uniquely identified with Christ in both His death and His resurrection. It is no more difficult to think of our selves as eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ than it is to think of ourselves as being "baptized into his death" (Romans 6:3 ), "buried with him" (Romans 6:4), and "in the likeness of his resurrection" (Romans 6:5).
In reality, we are saved by eating of His holy life and drinking His incorruptible blood (1 Peter 1:18-19). But this is a spiritual truth and is not something that we must try to do physically. The real question is whether or not you have truly believed in the Lord.
I thought you were bible alone, why do you need someone else's explanation?
Anthony MN

Minneapolis, MN

#456649 Jun 26, 2013
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
"Eucharist" is an invention of Catholics......
Recalling these words of Jesus, the Catholic Church professes that, in the celebration of the Eucharist, bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit and the instrumentality of the priest.
The truth is:
The Lord's Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members of the church, through partaking of the bread and the fruit of the vine, memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His second coming.
Book, chapter and verse where Jesus says the Lords supper is symbolic. Thanks.
marge

Leesburg, GA

#456650 Jun 26, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
We accept Jesus at His word. You on the other hand take a black marker and insert "this SYMBOLIZES My body".
Jesus took the bread and the cup.
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#456651 Jun 26, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
WELL!
It's about time!--I thought I was the only one!
Well, because ghosts man-I-fest in imaginations, there is no limit to what we can accomplish.

How was YOUR flight around the earth's orbit today ... and what did you learn about human stupidity that you didn't already know???

:)
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#456652 Jun 26, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yer prolly right...Prayer is absolutely worthless.
I suggest you don't tell that to the Muslims.

Your head might go rolling down the street poste haste, needles to say, with no body attached.

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
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Aug 16 Married in 10,583
News Boston cardinal, Jewish leaders have Holocaust ... (Feb '09) Aug 12 Jeremy 24
News Evangelical Trump supporters want meeting with ... Aug 9 Ms Sassy 1
News What Divides Catholics and Protestants? (Apr '08) Aug 8 -Prince Of Darkness- 84,840
News Pope 'loves China', Vatican official says on tr... Aug 8 Harold 2
News Pope Francis accepts resignation of Boston Auxi... Jul 29 Anti- 2
News 'That's all he wanted': Spicer, a devout Cathol... Jul 25 misleading troller 2
More from around the web