Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 589169 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.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#479674 Oct 2, 2013
Clay wrote:
<quoted text>
There really is no way to reconcile this incident. They most certainly took it the wrong way. regardless, it dug up some pain.
And yeah you're right, the woman may have believed their child was in limbo... this was the thought of many people back then. Why on Earth she would tell a grieving mother that is beyond me. But I'm not going to be able to be patch this up I see, with those two. So its best to drop it and next time i won't say anything due to the sensitive subject.
----------

Clay

Lisa's birthday was yesterday. She was so loving and always smiling. For her and for our Savior Who loves all 3 of us, I forgive you. It never happened,I believe your account. t is done and need not be mentioned again. Give Rose a little time.

Nick
Pad

Rockford, IL

#479675 Oct 2, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
"Those born of the Spirit (born again) have a confident trust in HIM, and in His Word.
Catholics hope is in their 'church'. They cannot hear any thing you say, because they fear being 'out' of harmony with the 'church'."
So only those who believe as you and Webster about what the bible says are born of the Spirit?
Our faith and hope is in Christ and the Church (which is His body)He founded. "You are Peter (Rock), and on this Rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
I think that it is great you have a church that gives you that security from its age of existence,but the church is not about a traditional existence,of buildings,tapestries,ceremonie s,pomp,and most of all occupancy. It is about believers who are connected with Christ,and doing the Will of His Father.The parable of the hirelings proves that.No matter who was hired first,the ones who were hired last still received the same wage as those who were hired first,and those past complained that the Master of the estate was unfair in how he paid those who came later.

It is what God is doing N O W that matters.He is raising up giant killers today,and whether he uses you Catholics,or we evangelicals,He still has to fortify us both with His Holy Spirit.We all need His anointing,and claiming you are the true church and God's Spirit is first exclusive to you,is no better than those complainers in the parable of the fieldworkers.It is quite obvious from the powerful move of God in all denominations today,that He wants to use as many as will listen to His voice,OBEY Him and do the very works that Please Him for the glory of His kingdom. If He wants to use an evangelical who is yielded to him,or a Catholic,Orthodox,or even a Presbyterian,He will.

All Christians have the credentials in Christ to do His Will and to follow in His footsteps!
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#479676 Oct 2, 2013
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop pretending your farts don't stink. There is nothing more obvious on this thread than the fact that the more anti-Catholic someone is, the more they reak of dung as they go about with their holier than thou attitudes.
Get real.
Born again is a conversion when one puts their personal faith in Christ.

So instead of playing the victim, tell me how a 3 month old child does this. If you can't, then like Preston I will say catholics aren't born again. thanks
Clay

United States

#479677 Oct 2, 2013
Its important, Chuck and Preston, that you realize you're not an authority on Baptism. If the Lord left it up to you guys to decipher Bible verses to figure out His will, then Christianity is a joke anyway.

Infant Baptism is being born again. This doesn't mean that the infant can't grow up and reject the Lord just as countless evangelicals have, after they did their alter call and became 'born again' as adults. Jesus said we need to endure to the end.

The Jews circumcise children and we Baptize children. Baptism is the new circumcision.
Later, when the Catholic child is at an age of maturity, they can choose to affirm the Baptismal vows their parents made when they brought them into the Church. This is called the Sacrament of Confirmation. But even then, this is no guarantee of salvation, because God doesn't remove our free will. We can reject Him til we take our last breath.

Again, you have no authority to decide on the matter. You would have no clue about any of those Bible verses if it weren't for the Church who compiled it, safeguarded it, hand copied and finally published the Bible in 1452- bringing it to the night stands of the laity for the first time in human history.
You're nuts if you think your method is the way Our Lord willed for the revelation of Baptism to be conveyed to us. Nuts!
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#479678 Oct 2, 2013
Clay wrote:
Infant Baptism is being born again.
Born again is a conversion when one puts their personal faith in Christ.

Infants can't do this Clay and until a catholic can prove otherwise, your church doctrine is all heresy. So instead of saying we are no authority on scripture, there are 42,000 denominations, this is what the early Christians taught, and every other excuse you make...prove it Clay. thanks
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#479679 Oct 2, 2013
Pad wrote:
<quoted text>I think that it is great you have a church that gives you that security from its age of existence,but the church is not about a traditional existence,of buildings,tapestries,ceremonie s,pomp,and most of all occupancy. It is about believers who are connected with Christ,and doing the Will of His Father.The parable of the hirelings proves that.No matter who was hired first,the ones who were hired last still received the same wage as those who were hired first,and those past complained that the Master of the estate was unfair in how he paid those who came later.
It is what God is doing N O W that matters.He is raising up giant killers today,and whether he uses you Catholics,or we evangelicals,He still has to fortify us both with His Holy Spirit.We all need His anointing,and claiming you are the true church and God's Spirit is first exclusive to you,is no better than those complainers in the parable of the fieldworkers.It is quite obvious from the powerful move of God in all denominations today,that He wants to use as many as will listen to His voice,OBEY Him and do the very works that Please Him for the glory of His kingdom. If He wants to use an evangelical who is yielded to him,or a Catholic,Orthodox,or even a Presbyterian,He will.
All Christians have the credentials in Christ to do His Will and to follow in His footsteps!
Thanks Dan, I've always appreciated your sincerity.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#479680 Oct 2, 2013
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
The "list" is in the sources you gave me. Obviously you NEVER read any of them, since you don't have any idea as to what I am referring to. So, please stop playing youranti-catholic games with me New Age! I DID read both of the (below sources) that you posted and (ADDITIONALLY) researched the names, background and the "personal opinions" that these "so-called bible experts" editorialized
http//www.earlychristianwritin gs.com
http//www.earlychristianwritin gs.com/acts.ht
Your "one sided modernistic author and writer sources, were obviously ALL "born yesterday"....... EVERY ONE of these authors and writer who consider themselves to be biblical experts including: Udo Schnelle, Hans Conzelmann, Joseph Fitzmyer, F.F. Bruce, Echhard Plumacher, Helmet Koester, Steven Davies, Burton Mack, Raymond Brown, Ben Witherington ----EVERY ONE OF THEM are pro-protestant, bible only, anti-catholic writers and authors who even go so far as to write papers on "Debunking Christianity"...... ALL of these (enlightened bible interpreters) wrote from (1992-1998). Obviously, you just "threw these sources out" without reading them, since you don't seem to know ANYTHING about what I am referring to!! Again--- we, as Catholics (all know) where you are coming from and we know that they are attempting to "undermine and debunk the TRUTH of TRUE CHURCH History and the TRUE INTERPRETATION of the Bible. You are as "oblivious to the TRUTH as ever, which is "no surprise to ANY of us Catholics
If you think this way, you have yet to support your position with facts.

Please provide a citation that states these individuals are "pro-Protestant" and anti-Catholic.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#479681 Oct 2, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Born again is a conversion when one puts their personal faith in Christ.
Infants can't do this Clay and until a catholic can prove otherwise, your church doctrine is all heresy. So instead of saying we are no authority on scripture, there are 42,000 denominations, this is what the early Christians taught, and every other excuse you make...prove it Clay. thanks
Jesus said it (baptism) was salvific and necessary.

He commanded baptism.

Thanks.

Dan

Omaha, NE

#479682 Oct 2, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Born again is a conversion when one puts their personal faith in Christ.
Infants can't do this Clay and until a catholic can prove otherwise, your church doctrine is all heresy. So instead of saying we are no authority on scripture, there are 42,000 denominations, this is what the early Christians taught, and every other excuse you make...prove it Clay. thanks
Baptism is regenerative. You are born in Christ at baptism.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON to Save us

#479683 Oct 2, 2013
Concerned in Brasil wrote:
<quoted text>
I only post through him he is a legalistic fool IMO, he has tried to refute posts of mine that he says were from Webster when they were not and then posts links to RC debaters arguing against James White.
He has never read one book, and most likely even a chapter of Early church fathers writings from which he posts quotes to support his RC man made tradition, he can only regurgitate RCC brain washing and propaganda. He has never on his own verified the context he blindly accepts what ever they tell him with out testing like a Bereans that the Apostle Paul exhorts as of high character.
I was raised in a Luther congregation, at 17th when I was allowed in Adult Bible study I started to ask questions because I had read my Bible and NOT one example of Infant Baptism could I find still can't find because its not there.
Why because you have to believe in Jesus the Christ as your Lord and Savior, you have to confess this, and you have to be able to repent.
So I asked my pastor how can this be with an infant??
He can't nor can a RC or anybody else who asserts infant baptism.
AT that time My Mom who is rasied in the Mennonite denomination while growing up who's family escaped Holland during the reformation, because the RCC was burning them at the stake, my ancestors, and those dutch who were having adult baptisms, she has the decrees that have been passed down to her and one day I will have one day. Yes the one true yadda yadda via Papal Bull burned those who believe as I do at the stake, and had it not been for the martyrs of the reformation the Fascists none as RC POPES would still be in power burning those who disagree with them today.
I have studied and found out that in many cases when infants were Baptized in the early church by recent Fathey absurd and I know this first hand is what the RCC does in Brazil.
If a parent baptizes their infant child in the RCC and the child never enters a RCC church ever again they will still count that human being as RC. Even in the case of person who writes the RCC in Brazil not do this, who has had an adult baptism in their Christian sect of choice they still count them.
So when they now say 65% of Brazil is RC that is very misleading for that reason alone.
As Roman Catholic nations become literate and have access to ancient texts, writings the flood is on to evangelical bible believing sects as is the Brazilian example.
95% RC in 87 and now only 65% 2013 and that number is highly suspect.
Anthony's pride just can't at this time allow him to admit he made a big mistake.
Let me say this,about that

And I really don't care,who believes,me,.I know,what made an impression on my life,

As,a,young person ..we learned Catholics were,given the gift of Catholics Faith

Other faiths might get to heaven But somehow not as high as,Catholics.

But a Catholics could NEVER go to another Church ..And get to heAven
Now,this,to.me is,what held me back on my own adult Baptism ..even though I had,not been A Catholic for years,or any denomination .FOR DECADES,

IT ALSO made me determined my child would NOT be baptized Catholic ..I exposed her to different Churches,. Gave her a Christian education ..I did NOT want her Bound by My choice ..though I wAnted her to believe in Our Lord Jesus,Christ . She does,

Reading what you say I understand better ,. When babies,are,baptized .
They are bound to that faith and counted as,members,

I understand this is,a belief common to Orthodoxy if one has been a practicing Orthodox,...not sure when this,kicks in ..so to speak

I've come to believe in the,saving Power brought by the calling of the,Holy Spirit when and why God chooses,..

Profession of true belief and,love for OUR Saviour . Repentance ...And,Baptism ...
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#479684 Oct 2, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Born again is a conversion when one puts their personal faith in Christ.
Infants can't do this Clay and until a catholic can prove otherwise, your church doctrine is all heresy. So instead of saying we are no authority on scripture, there are 42,000 denominations, this is what the early Christians taught, and every other excuse you make...prove it Clay. thanks
PROPOSITION: Is Christian Baptism sacramental and regenerational or is it merely a symbol?

FACT: The vast majority of Christians (i.e. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, etc.) believe that Baptism is regenerational -- that is to say, that the Sacrament itself transforms the person by "water and the Word," (cf. Eph 5:26) thus adopting that person into the Body of Christ and making that person a participant in the very same Sonship which Christ Himself enjoys with the Father (Romans 8:15-17, Galatians 4:6-7).

FACT: From earliest times, literally every Church Father and Christian bishop, as well as every orthodox Christian scholar until the Protestant reformation, understood Baptism as regenerational. This included Martin Luther and most of the Protestant reformers who followed him.

FACT: Yet, despite this, there are several Christian groups which deny that Baptism is regenerational, holding instead that it is merely an outward sign or symbol of one's inner faith in Christ. In this, they maintain that it is one's personal acceptance of Christ that matters; and that Baptism is no more than a ceremony in which one publicly proclaims and displays one's faith. Indeed, these same Christian groups believe that the doctrine of Baptismal regeneration is a corruption of what the Apostles preached, reducing the significance of this supposedly "symbolic ceremony" to the level of "magic" or "superstition." In this, they hold that only personal faith in Christ is of any importance and that "sprinkling water on someone's head" does absolutely nothing in and of itself.

Yet, can this position be correct? Well, to see, let's turn to the Scriptures themselves.

First of all, it must be said that there are many verses of Scripture which give the proponents of "symbolic Baptism" a great deal of trouble. These include:

1 Peter 3:21-22 --- "This prefigured Baptism, which saves you now. It is not a removal of dirt from the body, but an appeal to God for a clear conscious, through the Resurrection of Jesus Christ ..."

Acts 2:38 -- "Peter said to them,'Repent and be Baptized, every one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.' "

Mark 16:16 -- "Whoever believes and is Baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned."

So, aside from one's personal faith, the act of Baptism itself appears to be very important indeed. Those who hold that Baptism is merely symbolic cannot ignore this if they wish to take Scripture seriously.

cont.
truth

Perth, Australia

#479685 Oct 2, 2013
Clay

United States

#479686 Oct 2, 2013
Chuck wrote:
<quoted text>
Born again is a conversion when one puts their personal faith in Christ.
Infants can't do this Clay and until a catholic can prove otherwise, your church doctrine is all heresy. So instead of saying we are no authority on scripture, there are 42,000 denominations, this is what the early Christians taught, and every other excuse you make...prove it Clay. thanks
What's the difference? The infant can reject Christ when they grow up anyway, and so can you. You seem to think your alter call automatically saved you. Therefore, its the will of God to have an adult do it?
If I'm Jesus, i want Two parent in the covenant of marriage, to bring their infant to get Baptized and raise them in the faith. that's the normal ideal way.
Most fundies I know, hit rock bottom with the booze and drugs, and then 'got saved'. Well, that's an awesome event either way, but is it the normal path God wills for us?
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#479687 Oct 2, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus said it (baptism) was salvific and necessary.
He commanded baptism.
Thanks.
an infant cannot put he/her faith in Christ. You're welcome.
Chuck

Dublin, OH

#479688 Oct 2, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Baptism is regenerative. You are born in Christ at baptism.
An infant is born in Christ at baptism. lol...and they can't even remember it!!

Let me guess, don't have to because they have the certificate on mom and dad's wall at their house.
Truth

Leesburg, VA

#479689 Oct 2, 2013
Clay wrote:
Its important, Chuck and Preston, that you realize you're not an authority on Baptism. If the Lord left it up to you guys to decipher Bible verses to figure out His will, then Christianity is a joke anyway.
Infant Baptism is being born again. This doesn't mean that the infant can't grow up and reject the Lord just as countless evangelicals have, after they did their alter call and became 'born again' as adults. Jesus said we need to endure to the end.
The Jews circumcise children and we Baptize children. Baptism is the new circumcision.
Later, when the Catholic child is at an age of maturity, they can choose to affirm the Baptismal vows their parents made when they brought them into the Church. This is called the Sacrament of Confirmation. But even then, this is no guarantee of salvation, because God doesn't remove our free will. We can reject Him til we take our last breath.
Again, you have no authority to decide on the matter. You would have no clue about any of those Bible verses if it weren't for the Church who compiled it, safeguarded it, hand copied and finally published the Bible in 1452- bringing it to the night stands of the laity for the first time in human history.
You're nuts if you think your method is the way Our Lord willed for the revelation of Baptism to be conveyed to us. Nuts!
Clay,

You wrote:

Infant Baptism is being born again.

I have to respectfully disagree with you....

Infant/child....INNOCENT BLOOD, Clay.....

There is no need to baptized......

What is the purpose of baptism???

Psalm 106:38

38 They shed innocent blood,
the blood of their sons and daughters,
whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan,
and the land was desecrated by their blood.

***They shed INNOCENT BLOOD, the BLOOD of their sons and daughters.....

What did they sacrifice them to, Clay?

Did Jesus not have INNOCENT BLOOD???

**********

Study these scriptures, Clay....

Matthew 27:22-26

22 “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked.

They all answered,“Crucify him!”

23 “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate.

But they shouted all the louder,“Crucify him!”

24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, <<<<<he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd.*****“I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said.“It is your responsibility!”*****> >>>>

25 All the people answered,~~~~~“His blood is on us and on our children!”~~~~~

26 Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

***His blood is on US and on OUR CHILDREN....INNOCENT BLOOD...

What were they thinking?

Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#479690 Oct 2, 2013
cont. to Chuck

Yet, let's look at this issue from another angle. For example, as we've already seen in Acts 2:38, Baptism is clearly associated with the forgiveness of sins:

"Repent and be Baptized, every one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Now, this being the case, one cannot avoid seeing a connection between Baptism and Jesus' healing miracles -- miracles which He almost always associated with the forgiveness of sins. For example, in Mark 2:3-12 we read:

"They came bringing him a paralytic carried by four men. Unable to get near Jesus because of the crowd, they opened the roof above him. After they had broken through, they let down the mat on which the paralytic was lying. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic 'Child, your sins are forgiven.' Now some of the scribes were sitting there asking themselves,'Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming. Who but God alone can forgive sins?' Jesus immediately knew in His mind what they were thinking to themselves, so He said,'Why are you thinking such things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, "Your sins are forgiven" or to say "Rise, pick up your mat and walk?" But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth'-- He said to the paralytic,'I say to you, rise, pick up your mat, and go home.' He rose, picked up his mat at once, and went away in the sight of everyone."

So, from this, we can clearly see that the Scriptures draw a connection between Jesus' miracles and the forgiveness of sins. So, why do I bring this up?:-) Because it forces us to ask a very significant question:

QUESTION: What was the source of Jesus' miracles? Did the Lord's miracles emanate from Jesus Himself, being direct acts of His Divine, creative authority, or were they produced merely by the individual's personal faith in Jesus? Was it the individual's faith, and only the individual's faith, which brought about the miracle (i.e. a mystical, "psychosomatic" response)? Or was it something more?

And, indeed, the answer to this question is all-important to one's view of Baptism. If Jesus' miracles came about through His own power bestowed upon an individual, then Baptismal regeneration is certainly possible. Yet, if it was merely the person's faith in Jesus which cured them, then Baptism as a symbol makes perfect sense.

And, indeed, at first glance this seems to be the case. After all, how many times did Jesus say to those He cured "Thy faith has healed thee" or "Thy faith has made thee whole" ?

Therefore, can we not say that these miracles, like Baptism itself, are merely the product of the person's faith?

No.:-) No, we cannot. Because, if we turn to Mark 5:25-34, we see that it was not merely the person's faith, but also power emanating from Jesus which brought about these miracles.

"There was a woman afflicted with hemorrhages for twelve years. She had suffered greatly at the hands of many doctors and had spent all that she had. Yet she was not helped but only grew worse. She had heard about Jesus and came up behind Him in the crowd and touched His cloak. She said,'If I but touch His clothes, I shall be cured.' Immediately, her flow of blood dried up. She felt in her body that she was healed of her affliction. Jesus, aware at once that POWER HAD GONE OUT FROM HIM, turned and asked,' Who has touched my clothes?'....The woman, realizing what had happened to her, approached in fear and trembling. She fell down before Jesus and told Him the whole truth. He said to her,'Daughter, your faith has saved you.' "

cont.
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#479691 Oct 2, 2013
Ah! So, it was not merely this woman's faith. Rather, it was the woman's faith in combination with a very real power bestowed by Jesus. Thus, how can we say that Baptism is any different???

For example, would the proponents of "symbolic Baptism" suggest that the Lord's power to heal was somehow "magical" or "superstitious"? I doubt they would.:-) Yet, that is exactly what they say in regard to Baptismal regeneration.

Yet, didn't Jesus commission His disciples to Baptize in His name (Matt 28:19)? Just as he commissioned them to heal and cast out demons in His name, right?:-)

So, then, if Jesus' miracles (and those of His disciples) were acts of regeneration, so is His Sacrament of Baptism. Indeed, it cannot be otherwise, UNLESS

(a) One wishes to say that Jesus possessed no personal power to heal or perform miracles, but that these miracles were merely "psychosomatic" responses from those who believed in Him, OR...

(b) Despite Mark 2:1-12, etc., Jesus' healing miracles had no connection to the forgiveness of sins (and, thus, Jesus made people physically whole while leaving them spiritually alienated from the Father -- a ridiculous proposition).

Yet, if one takes either of these positions, one must also be willing to ignore the Scriptures (viz. Mark 2:1-12 & Mark 5:30).

As for the orthodox Christian understanding of Baptism (that of Baptismal regeneration), we recognize that Christ still touches people through the ministry of His Church. In this, we recognize that two things are necessary for salvation:

(1) Christ's free offer of salvation, and ...

(2) Our willing acceptance of this free offer of salvation.

If this were not the case (i.e. if #2 above was not necessary), then everyone who ever existed would have been automatically saved when Jesus died on the Cross (1 Tim 2:4). And it is in the realm of #2 which our faith comes in.

Yet,#1 is also an intimate reality for those of us who understand the Traditional doctrine of Baptismal regeneration. In this, Christ does not merely offer us salvation through a promise made 2000 years ago. Rather, He offers it to us in personal intimacy through the Sacrament of His Church. And, through this Sacrament, He touches us directly, just as He directly touched the paralytic and the woman with the hemorrhage. And, thus, in Baptism, we have

(1) Christ's healing power, through the ministry of His Body (the Church), touching us and making us whole, and ...

(2) Our faith in Christ moving us to accept this healing power.

And this is how Christ takes us unto Himself.

So, according to the Scriptures, Baptism is regenerational, sacramental, and intrinsic to one's acceptance of Christ. For, as the Lord says, it cannot be otherwise:

"Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit." -- John 3:5

Mark J. Bonocore

http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a25.htm
hojo

Minneapolis, MN

#479692 Oct 2, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
<quoted text>
God's word exist today in the New Testament just as it did when DAVID WROTE IT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
Psa_119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
YOU CALL GOD A LIAR AND REFUSE TO RECEIVE HIS WORD...
THE STUBBORNNESS OF YOUR OWN HEART COULD COST YOU YOUR ETERNAL SOUL..
The "WRITTEN WORD OF GOD" as we know it today (in the Bible) NEVER existed until the Early Church Fathers in 382,393, and 397AD interpreted the letters, documents, parchments and manuscripts from the Apostles, forming the "Canon of Scripture", giving all of us the TRUE INTERPRETATION of Gods Word (Old Testament and New Testament.......... We, as Catholics, know the TRUTH of Gods Word, given to us over 1500 years ago by the TRUE INTERPRETATION from the Early Church Fathers. Today (as it has for over 2000 years) the TRUE Word of God is begin taught,ministered, confirmed and instructed today in and through Jesus Christs One True Catholic Church....... We RECEIVE the TRUTH of Gods Word, each and every day, at Daily Mass, in the Eucharist (Jesus' TRUE Body and Blood and in the 7 Sacraments....... You have "consistently" shown all of us Catholics that you "refuse" to believe the TRUTH of the TRUE INTERPRETATION of Gods Word, by just "making up your own (editorialized) anti-catholic interpretation of Gods Word, from each bible verse that you list, as you "continue" to condemn and judge the faith of "any and all" Christians,(especially Catholics) because they don't agree with your "soap box" ministry!!.....You can't even find agreement with your own "personal interpretation" of the bible among the majority of other bible only Protestants on this forum......... You "fundies" NEVER stop arguing among yourselves as to what the true interpretation of (each verse) of the bible actually is!!........ I/we as Catholics will (continue) to rely on our TRUE Faith and Salvation in Jesus Christ,(as other Catholics have for the past 2000 years) in and through Our Lords One True Catholic Church.......... God is Our final judge!!!....... Not you, Confrinting, or ANY OTHER (self-appointed bible only Protestant preacher) who twists, manipulates and mis-interprets the TRUE Word of God and the TRUTH of TRUE Apostolic Church History, to make it mean "ONLY" what you/they want it to mean!!!!
Pad

Rockford, IL

#479693 Oct 2, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
Some self righteous "Christians" are so clouded by the sin of a homosexual using a condom that that forget their Christian imperative to keep him alive so that he has a chance of repentance rather than lose his soul.The pope is theologically correct.
I did read what the Pope said about the obsessing over homosexuality and even abortion.What the pope failed to include,although he had some very good points,was that it is the DUTY of the Body of Christ to raise a standard against sin.That of course can be overdone,and wrongfully applied as well.

We have to be careful how we stand up against certain issues.But the statement"Be instant in season and out of season" also causes us to realize we do have a responsibility to speak out against the "giants" that encroach upon the whole society.

Homosexuality is a "giant" in our lifetime today.There is not one new show aired on TV that does not bring out a homosexual relationship. The world is doing this,so I am not saying they should not,because what the world does is already condemned in the Scriptures.But the believers have to be ready to take a stand which defends the daily life of each and everyone of us.Will the"giant" stop to just declare his or her own right to exist?We may all agree for the personal rights of individuals to exist,have a job they want without persecution,eat where they want to. But when they want to enter the classroom and demand that their lifestyle be promoted and taught to the very young,I believe we have the right to protest.

Same-sex marriage is a given,why? Well the world is biting at the bit to have it,the media is flaunting it continually,so it is soon to be the law of most countries to allow for such.But that does not mean the Body of Christ has to marry such individuals,nor go out of their way to accept the so called"sanctity of those unions".

Those Protestant groups or former Reformer churches who are promoting same-sex marriages by secretly marrying couples in states that have not passed the resolutions yet,are anathema to the Body of Christ.They have long gone their own way,to bring a curse upon their own heads.The reason why the reformer churches that have sold their souls to the devil,are doing these things,is because they are skeletons,no life,dead churches that glorify Man rather than God.They even mock God in their services.And they are empty for the most part,homosexual couples will bring more bodies,and children into their dead mausoleums.Their practices are so immersed in curses,that they are unaware that they are "ICHABOD" Which means:The glory of God has left us.

Ok so we can love homosexuals and be respectful to them,and that is without saying,as most believers are more than willing to love and respect others for the glory of Christ.But we do not have to run out of our way to make their path to receiving the curse of their own actions smoother,glossed over,comfortable.We are salt and light,and that requires pain and discomfort.

I eat lunch with a homosexual every day at work,there are times he wanted no doubt to throw me out of the room.It has not been easy for him to eat with me.But he wants me there for some reason!

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 St. Peter's overflows for historic day of 4 popes (Apr '14) 4 hr pazuzu 57
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 9 hr IveGotFamilyInHOP 9,371
News Philippines cardinal worked for peace with Muslims (Apr '14) 9 hr ELIAS IBARRA 9
News Francis expects short papacy 12 hr ELIAS IBARRA 12
News Pope finds popularity and dissent at 2-year mark 13 hr ELIAS IBARRA 10
News After a visit from the pope, Mr. Castro has muc... Thu L I G E R 2
News What Divides Catholics and Protestants? (Apr '08) Wed barry 84,264
More from around the web