Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 568,638
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story

Since: Sep 09

Terrace, Canada

#456571 Jun 26, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said - I get it. You are the one who thinks I don't.
That would be your problem, not mine.
What are you going to do about it?
You can believe you have a spirit, but that is an emotional concept ... not a fact.

You seem to favor some myths more than others, and that simply plays into your beliefs of your present "self."

Self however, is always subject to change.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#456572 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It's biblically sourced.
Mmmmmm. Don't think so. Got a citation?
She was fully human, not divine, thus couldn't stand in for Jesus.
OK, within the ideology that does make sense.
We do both. We believe that we are all one community on Earth and in Heaven, thus intercessory prayer.
"All one community = intercessory prayer"? I don't understand this. If Mary was fully human, why are you praying to her? Or a saint? Isn't that idolatry? Aren't you taking away power from God and giving it to humans?

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#456573 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
If God restored severed limbs for the asking, then it wouldn't be miraculous, would it?
Of course it would. God supposedly intervenes in many other ways, what's with the abandonment of amputees about? Not even one verifiable time? Kinda odd.

Since: Sep 09

Terrace, Canada

#456574 Jun 26, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
...and nothing relative to the "truth" of Jesus or his teachings. That was the point.
There you go AGAIN! Posting as though Jesus was a real character that actually spoke words to others.

Then when I state that the Jesus' myth was one of many, you write back that you KNOW that was the case.

You swing from pillar to post.

Since: Sep 09

Terrace, Canada

#456575 Jun 26, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you still there?
:o)
No ... GOD put me to death this morning after I tested his/her/it's existence.

This is my ghost posting. Needless to say NOT my "holy" ghost.

:)
Dan

Omaha, NE

#456576 Jun 26, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
Mmmmmm. Don't think so. Got a citation?
<quoted text>
OK, within the ideology that does make sense.
<quoted text>
"All one community = intercessory prayer"? I don't understand this. If Mary was fully human, why are you praying to her? Or a saint? Isn't that idolatry? Aren't you taking away power from God and giving it to humans?
Luke 1:28 (which was waterboarded all last week and I'm not doing it again-look up the belief in the Catechism if you want the detail)

Praying to the souls of the departed for their intercession and prayers. Divine worship only goes to God. Again, look up the Catechism for elaboration if you want it. It's all there.

Since: Sep 09

Terrace, Canada

#456577 Jun 26, 2013
From the article in the September 2010 edition of the magazine "Scientific American" ... The end or is it?... comes the following..........

Edges of Time

Well before Albert Einstein came along, philosophers through the ages had debated whether time could be mortal. Immanuel Kant considered the issue to be an “antinomy”—something you could argue both ways, leaving you not knowing what to think.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#456578 Jun 26, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it would. God supposedly intervenes in many other ways, what's with the abandonment of amputees about? Not even one verifiable time? Kinda odd.
It'd be like ordering a pizza. Call and it's there. Handy, but not miraculous.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#456579 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Luke 1:28 (which was waterboarded all last week and I'm not doing it again-look up the belief in the Catechism if you want the detail)
Praying to the souls of the departed for their intercession and prayers. Divine worship only goes to God. Again, look up the Catechism for elaboration if you want it. It's all there.
Luke 1:28 "The angel went to her and said,'Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.'"

From this you get that she was sinless?

Well, I sure don't see how you could get that from that passage, but if this has been beaten to death then that's OK.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#456580 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It'd be like ordering a pizza. Call and it's there. Handy, but not miraculous.
Then why pray at all?

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#456581 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
It'd be like ordering a pizza. Call and it's there. Handy, but not miraculous.
BTW, are you really equating suffering and dismemberment to calling for a pizza? Really?

And if God did regrow severed limbs then that certainly would be miraculous. God will supposedly move mountains if you have faith the size of a mustard grain, and prayer is supposed to be answered. It's all set-up to work, and yet there is no discernible follow-through on God's part.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456582 Jun 26, 2013
039
Human Being wrote:
<quoted text>
Oxbow:
In simplist terms Acquinas explain it:
""An individual can be considered either as an individual or as part of a whole, a member of a society .... Considered in the second way an act can be his although he has not done it himself, nor has it been done by his free will but by the rest of the society or by its head, the nation being considered as doing what the prince does. For a society is considered as a single man of whom the individuals are the different members (St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 12). Thus the multitude of men who receive their human nature from Adam is to be considered as a single community or rather as a single body .... If the man, whose privation of original justice is due to Adam, is considered as a private person, this privation is not his 'fault', for a fault is essentially voluntary. If, however, we consider him as a member of the family of Adam, as if all men were only one man, then his privation partakes of the nature of sin on account of its voluntary origin, which is the actual sin of Adam" (De Malo, iv, 1)."
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???????

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456583 Jun 26, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
The only thing that makes sense to you is your "Editorialized,(bible only) inconsistent, relative truth, contradicting Protestant "Church History Book" that changes whenever and whichever direction
There is nothing else to say Ox! That about "sums it up" for you and your contradicting and inconsistent Protestant "bible only" "merry-go-round"--of 42,000 +(relative truth) denominations.
That neither qualifies...try again

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456584 Jun 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Oxbow" What did Christ mean when He spoke of eating His body and drinking His blood???
We have two very interesting Old Testament references which help us to understand what Jesus is talking about. The first is in Psalm 27:2 where David is talking about the wicked who are coming against him. "When the wicked came against me to eat up my flesh, my enemies and foes, they stumbled and fell."
We have to ask ourselves, does David literally mean that these are cannibalistic enemies or is he using picture language?
He is talking here about the wicked who want to profit from his death. They want to kill David because they want to obtain some kind of benefit from his death.
This example from the Old Testament gives us an insight into what Jesus means by eating his flesh—it means to benefit from His death on the cross.
**********
You left out the other one. David longed for water from a certain well that was in enemy held territory. Three of his men risked their lives to go and get some of that water. He refused to drink it, pouring it out as a sacrifice to the Lord, for, he said, is this not the BLOOD of the men who brought it? II Sam. 23
KayMarie
A other senior moment!!! Thanks for your help....

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#456585 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Um, the Council of Nicea was a gathering of Christian bishops-not a political gathering.
Sure...Constantine and his right hand man were bishops right?
They were "ordered" by the head of state to bring all their writings "bound in leather"...Constantine gave orders to Eusebius Pamphili to use what was useful in those writings to establish a central state religion and discard(destroy) the rest. The whole meeting was like a barroom brawl, and finally Constantine (head of the empire and the meeting) became disgusted with it all, and made the irrevocable decisions that led to the "state" making the final decisions of the central beliefs and the institution of the church/state religion which was ordered to produce 50 bibles that would be accepted by the "church" (bishops), or they would risk excommunication or death.

“Credulity is not a virtue”

Since: Apr 09

San Francisco

#456586 Jun 26, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure...Constantine and his right hand man were bishops right?
They were "ordered" by the head of state to bring all their writings "bound in leather"...Constantine gave orders to Eusebius Pamphili to use what was useful in those writings to establish a central state religion and discard(destroy) the rest. The whole meeting was like a barroom brawl, and finally Constantine (head of the empire and the meeting) became disgusted with it all, and made the irrevocable decisions that led to the "state" making the final decisions of the central beliefs and the institution of the church/state religion which was ordered to produce 50 bibles that would be accepted by the "church" (bishops), or they would risk excommunication or death.
You mean it wasn't a bunch of well-meaning church leaders who channeled God to tell them what letters and books to include in the canon?

You make it sound like a Papal election or something.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#456587 Jun 26, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="Oxbow" Catholics teach all born are guilty of the original sin of Adam and Eve.. This was God's reaction to same: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life...
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...
**********
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Rom 5:15 But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Rom 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
KayMarie
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

You quoted this Scripture in support that at birth all human beings have the stain on their soul of original sin....based on "For since by man came death"....

Following that logic, it can also be said that at birth all human beings are resurrected of the dead...based on "by man came also the resurrection of the dead"....which cancels the original sin you say all human beings are guilty of at birth!!!!!
Human Being

Welsh, LA

#456588 Jun 26, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
And YOUR pre-conception ... that apparently from your point of view, is a conception that occurs before a conception, is that a Jew will come to save your Christian "soul" from spending eternity in hell with the rest of human refuse.
Your supposed "pre"-conception is no different than your conception.
:)
June:

You are very confusing.

Perhaps I should have used the word pre-supposition, instead of pre-conception. And I would have been more precise in my own meaning. Sorry to not have done so.

Since: Sep 09

Terrace, Canada

#456589 Jun 26, 2013
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.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#456590 Jun 26, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
.....and it's not a strawman.
What empirical evidence of God would suffice for you?
Just throw a dart...there is none or you would have run to present it.

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
Transgender man: I met with Pope Francis 17 hr TerryE 1
United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Jan 28 Married in 8,881
Pope's visit to stoke climate fight Jan 26 SpaceBlues 1
Pope says Catholics must practice a responsible... Jan 21 theidiotsareunited 3
More Jan 20 George 3
Filipino Catholics hails new saints (Apr '14) Jan 20 KidlatNgayon 80
Pope: Don't Breed Like Rabbits. Or Use Birth Co... Jan 20 Weird or What 1
More from around the web