Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 690419 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.

June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#491365 Nov 13, 2013
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>==========
JUNES LATEST POST Continuing to lie after several corrections (posts noted)
June VanDerMark|
#491313
Well, whether you are or aren't Catholic, you are an anti-Semitic Christian, who supports the vicious anti-Semitist John Chrysostom.
You never commented one word against his anti-Semitic rants against the Jews ... but rather made a joke in return to me.
That's the icing on the cake concerning your lack of care for the Jews.
==========
1.#491231 The Queen of Honesty who straightens out all us believers out all us believers actually lies??? I cant believe it.
June said "and you are now defending his anti-Semitism, which also makes you anti-Semitic"
My First Post Re Chrysostom Reads #491040:
AS for myself, I believe that John has weakness in that particular area AS FOR MYSELF, I BELIEVE THAT JOHN HAS WEAKNESS IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA AND IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR IT, EVEN GIVEN HIS UNPARALLELED CONTRIBUTIONS
==========
2 #491180 Yes, we admitted Chrysostom had this weakness. He was a man. He was not infallible. Noone defended this. Noone justified or minimized this. Somehow you will not admit the facts we presented about him. I guess thats because you are so brutally intellectually honest.
==========
You started out by praising dear old John, until I brought forth his REAL character, and then you admitted that dear John had a "weakness."

He didn't have a weakness. He had an aim to vilify innocent Jews as Christ-killers and to in turn support the Catholic religion as being based on "Jehovah's" ONLY truth.

You don't fool me with your come-back in trying to justify the reason you adored John Chrysostom ... the rabid hater of Jews.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#491366 Nov 13, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
That post was directed at Guest. Not Chuck. And no I don't find any proof. At least, not nearly the scale people wish.
Yesterday was the feast of St. Josephat. He was a Byzantine Catholic who tried to bring peace between the Ukrainian Orthodox and Rome. The Orthodox killed him for it.
Our Pope apologized for sins we committed against our Orthodox brothers. There was no return apology. In fact, you guys won't even refer to us as your brothers...
So you cant find proof of the immense numbers the Catholic's killed during the Inquisition the Crusades, Etc. but you have conclusive proof of one Orthodox murder commited in 1623.If I were the Vatican I would get a new CSI division. LOl

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#491367 Nov 13, 2013
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
And, I second that!!!
AMEN!!!
Let the little children come to me ...

Exactly ..was just tryin to clarify that I think he poser is wrong within what her two go on is,teaching these,days ..But I could be wrong on that .

.I just never saw a credible source that Catholics say babies,are in purgatory ..

One poser thinks LIMBO is,still.around....But I believe the most knowledgeable here DO NOT say either purgatory or limbo any more

Since: Jan 12

Memphis, TN

#491368 Nov 13, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
And had Jesus existed, he also would have been a homicidal sociopath ... working for the Catholics in Catholic confessionals, while the Catholics were busy torturing and murdering OTHER Jews.
Theology in all religions is based on utter nonsense.
If Jesus existed then he would have been tortured by the Holy Roman Empire for professing to be the King of the Jews as which he was a Jew. The Jewish rabbis would have called for his death for also claiming to be a son of God.....Oh, wait! He WAS tortured by those Romans by which the church was started! And the rabbis DID call for his death for making what was perceived as blasphemous claims!! Soooo, Jesus must have existed....being that there are actual historical records from the land that were preserved against rigorous efforts to destroy them all. To my point, how could Jesus have been a Catholic?! He didn't change Jewish law, he worshipped alongside Jews. Catholics would have been and STILL are considered gentiles.
Michael

Canada

#491369 Nov 13, 2013
Philo the Jewish Philosopher never ever mentions a Jesus and Philo lived during the same time Jesus was suppose to have lived.

.......Philo wrote extensive apologetics on the Jewish religion and commentaries on contemporary politics. About thirty manuscripts and at least 850,000 words are extant. Philo offers commentary on all the major characters of the Pentateuch and, as we might expect, mentions Moses more than a thousand times.

.......Yet Philo says not a word about Jesus, Christianity nor any of the events described in the New Testament. In all this work, Philo makes not a single reference to his alleged contemporary "Jesus Christ", the godman who supposedly was perambulating up and down the Levant, exorcising demons, raising the dead and causing earthquake and darkness at his death.

.....With Philo's close connection to the house of Herod, one might reasonably expect that the miraculous escape from a royal prison of a gang of apostles (Acts 5.18,40), or the second, angel-assisted, flight of Peter, even though chained between soldiers and guarded by four squads of troops (Acts 12.2,7) might have occasioned the odd footnote. But not a murmur. Nothing of Agrippa "vexing certain of the church" or killing "James brother of John" with the sword (Acts 12.1,2). "

.......It simply makes no sense that Philo would not have recorded something about Jesus, vis-a-vis the Jesus described in the book of Mark. Those who argue that Philo would have merely ignored a crowd drawing, miracle working godman because he could not have conceived of the 'logos' in human form merely beg the question that Philo's position would never change, even in the face of negating evidence!

.....Philo never reports ever seeing the godman represented in the Gospels. His silence is glaring. And Philo may well have even provided us with a positive rule out for a real Jesus Christ.

...SOMETHING IS TERRIBLY WRONG!
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#491370 Nov 13, 2013
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
(lol)! No eyewitness accounts:
Anyone can write about a dead person and say whatever they like.
........ Tacitus was born 30 yrs after what the bible claims the death of Jesus... lucian was born 92 yrs after. josephus was born 4 yrs after christ of the bible.
.....Can we get writing by someone who was actually there? Doesn't that make sense to you?
You are still believing people who were never there and witnessed anything. You can't verify that the 4 gospels were written by the 4 men associated with them.
You fly by the seat of your pants when it comes to evidence.
........something is wrong!
All those characters were created by Catholic theologians, and that includes the mythical Jesus-story that was simply re-warmed from other myths.

They can see the lies ... but they don't WANT to see them, as they want to believe they are SPECIAL ... and I suggest that their greed to perceive their selves as special ... is their down-fall!
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#491371 Nov 13, 2013
The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors … Christianity before Christ, by Kersey Graves … first published in 1875.

and finally these twenty Jesus Christs (accepting their character for the name) laid the foundation for the salvation of the world, and ascended back to heaven.

1. Chrishna of Hindostan.
2. Budha Sakia of India.
3. Salivahana of Bermuda
4. Zulis, or Zhule, also Osiris and Orus, of Egypt.
5. Odin of the Scandinavians.
6. Crite of Chaldea.
7. Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia.
8. Baal and Taut,“the only Begotten of God,” of Phenicia.
9. Indra of Thibet.
10. Bali of Afghanistan.
11. Jao of Nepaul.
12. Wittoa of the Bilingonese.
13. Thammuz of Syria.
14. Atys of Phrygia.
15. Xamolxis of Thrace.
16. Zoar of the Bonzes.
17. Adad of Assyria.
18. Deva Tat,aud Sammonocadam of Siam.
19. Alcides of Thebes.
20. Mikado of the Sintoos.
21. Beddru of Japan.
22. Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids.
23. Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls.
24. Cadmus of Greece.
25. Hil and Feta of the Mandaites.
26. Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico.
27. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls.
28. Ischy of the Island of Formosa.
29. Divine teacher of Plato.
30. Holy One of xaca.
31. Fohi and Tien of China.
32. Adonis, son of the virgin Io of Greece.
33. Ision and Quirinus of Rome.
34. Prometheus of Caucasus.
35. Mohammud, or Mahomet, of Arabia.

These have all received divine honors, have nearly all been worshiped as Gods, or sons of Gods; were mostly incarnated as Christs, Saviors, Messiahs, or Mediators; not a few of them were reputedly born of virgins; some of them filling a character almost identical with that ascribed by the Christian’s bible to Jesus Christ; many of them like him, are reported crucified; and all of them, taken together, furnish a prototype and parallel for nearly every important incident and wonder-inciting miracle, doctrine and precept recorded in the New Testament, of the Christian’s Savior. Surely, with so many Saviors the world cannot, or should not, be lost.

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#491372 Nov 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="RoSesz" <quoted text>
Well that's what I believe but I think.with all the,stuff that's,been posted ..That NOW,the,Catholic belief is the,same .
I don't think.they went from limbo to purgatory ..But I could be wrong .
----------
Don't worry, honey. God calls these little ones 'My children'. He will not destroy them or torment them. He told the Israelites not to 'put My children through the fire'. Surely HE won't do that.
There is no purgatory......
KayMarie
Oh exactly ..that's,my. Belief ....:)

I used to worry on it ..But haven't for a while ...:)
ReginaM

Toms River, NJ

#491373 Nov 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="ReginaM" <quoted text>
The only thing we can conclude is that the unbaptized are left to God's mercy. No one can speak for Him, as many here are trying to do, unfortunately.
This is why it's so important to stop playing God and have your babies baptized instead of taking matters into your own hands and saying it's of no consequence. Later on people are sorry and then they attempt to play God further by saying what He will or will not do. He never said unbaptized children will go straight to heaven, never!
What He did say is that we *must* be baptized with water and the spirit or we will not see heaven, period.
----------
Putting your first and last lines together, we see that unbaptized babies will not see heaven, period.
Give chapter and verse to "we *must* be baptized or we will not see heaven, period."
KayMarie
Unless one is born of water and the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Jn 3:5 In Christendom that is baptism, always has been, always will be (that is until a few years ago upon the advent of evangelical fundamentalism).

Now give chapter and verse where God excepts children from this command and says they will go directly to heaven upon their death.

The Church teaches that unbaptized infants and children are left to the mercy of God. We do not presume to speak for Him, nor do we presume upon His mercy. We place our hope in an all loving and merciful God, of course. But it's up to Him, not us.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#491374 Nov 13, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
That post was directed at Guest. Not Chuck. And no I don't find any proof. At least, not nearly the scale people wish.
Yesterday was the feast of St. Josephat. He was a Byzantine Catholic who tried to bring peace between the Ukrainian Orthodox and Rome. The Orthodox killed him for it.
Our Pope apologized for sins we committed against our Orthodox brothers. There was no return apology. In fact, you guys won't even refer to us as your brothers...
Gee Clay, and you guys have been telling Nick and I that we are the only Orthodox that feel this way about reuniting.....even tho this happened in 1623, the majority of the orthodox people still feel the same.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#491375 Nov 13, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
Good to see you, Herm.
Same here Chess.
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#491376 Nov 13, 2013
The fact that male theologians always wrote of male saviors ought to put red flags up in all people that are willing to ask questions of the theologies.

Where are the female saviors??? WHERE??? And why can't the creator just as easily be female, as male???

Mythical JUNK!!!
ReginaM

Toms River, NJ

#491377 Nov 13, 2013
confrinting with the word wrote:
who="ReginaM" <quoted text>
The only thing we can conclude is that the unbaptized are left to God's mercy. No one can speak for Him, as many here are trying to do, unfortunately.
This is why it's so important to stop playing God and have your babies baptized instead of taking matters into your own hands and saying it's of no consequence. Later on people are sorry and then they attempt to play God further by saying what He will or will not do. He never said unbaptized children will go straight to heaven, never!
What He did say is that we *must* be baptized with water and the spirit or we will not see heaven, period.
----------
Putting your first line and last line together, we see that unbaptized babies will not see heaven, period.

KayMarie
Not at all. We are bound by God's commands and sacraments...He is not. We hope in His mercy, but apparently you don't since you "see that unbaptized babies will not see heaven period."
See how dangerous it is to cherry-pick and take sentences and phrases out of context? How much more dangerous when you do it with scripture!
Michael

Canada

#491378 Nov 13, 2013
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
"Does the Catholic Church still sell indulgences? "
That's like asking, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" The Catholic Church does not now nor has it ever approved the sale of indulgences. This is to be distinguished from the undeniable fact that individual Catholics (perhaps the best known of them being the German Dominican Johann Tetzel [1465-1519]) did sell indulgences--but in doing so they acted contrary to explicit Church regulations. This practice is utterly opposed to the Catholic Church's teaching on indulgences, and it cannot be regarded as a teaching or practice of the Church.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/does-t...
......the Roman Catholic Church was all powerful in western Europe. There was no legal alternative. The Catholic Church jealously guarded its position and anybody who was deemed to have gone against the Catholic Church was labelled a heretic and burnt at the stake.
Why was the Roman Catholic Church so powerful?
.....Its power had been built up over the centuries and relied on ignorance and superstition on the part of the populace. It had been indoctrinated into the people that they could only get to heaven via the church.
....This gave a priest enormous power at a local level on behalf of the Catholic Church. The local population viewed the local priest as their ‘passport’ to heaven as they knew no different and had been taught this from birth by the local priest. Such a message was constantly being repeated to ignorant people in church service after church service. Hence keeping your priest happy was seen as a prerequisite to going to heaven.
....This relationship between people and church was essentially based on money - hence the huge wealth of the Catholic Church. Rich families could buy high positions for their sons in the Catholic Church and this satisfied their belief that they would go to heaven and attain salvation. However, a peasant had to pay for a child to be christened (this had to be done as a first step to getting to heaven as the people were told that a non-baptised child could not go to heaven); you had to pay to get married and you had to pay to bury someone from your family in holy ground.
To go with this, you would pay a sum to the church via the collection at the end of each service (as God was omnipresent he would see if anyone cheated on him), you had to pay tithes (a tenth of your annual income had to be paid to the church which could be either in money or in kind such as seed, animals etc.) and you were expected to work on church land for free for a specified number of days per week. The days required varied from region to region but if you were working on church land you could not be working on your own land growing food etc. and this could be more than just an irritant to a peasant as he would not be producing for his family or preparing for the next year.
......However, unfair and absurd this might appear to someone in the 1990’s it was the accepted way of life in 1500 as this was how it had always been and no-one knew any different and very few were willing to speak out against the Catholic Church as the consequences were too appalling to contemplate.
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#491379 Nov 13, 2013
Michael wrote:
SOMETHING IS TERRIBLY WRONG!
Theology is terribly wrong ... ALL theology!

It's all based on curses and blessings and fortune-telling and superstitious ritualistic nonsense.

We can't know what happens in the next moment ... much less what happens after our bodies die ... if anything.

And THAT I suggest, is the most credible concept of truth.
Michael

Canada

#491380 Nov 13, 2013
Anthony:

...Do note, if you did not go to heaven then the likelihood was that your soul had been condemned to Hell. Heresy was visibly punished with public burnings which you were expected to attend. John Huss was accused of heresy and granted a safe passage to Constance in modern Switzerland to defend himself at trial. He never got his trial as he was arrested regardless of his guarantee of a safe passage by the Catholic Church and burnt in public.

The Catholic Church also had a three other ways of raising revenue.

Relics: These were officially sanctioned by the Vatican. They were pieces of straw, hay, white feathers from a dove, pieces of the cross etc. that could be sold to people as the things that had been the nearest to Jesus on Earth. The money raised went straight to the church and to the Vatican. These holy relics were keenly sought after as the people saw their purchase as a way of pleasing God. It also showed that you had honoured Him by spending your money on relics associated with his son.

Indulgences:

......These were ‘certificates’ produced in bulk that had been pre-signed by the pope which pardoned a person’s sins and gave you access to heaven. Basically if you knew that you had sinned you would wait until a pardoner was in your region selling an indulgence and purchase one as the pope, being God’s representative on Earth, would forgive your sins and you would be pardoned. This industry was later expanded to allow people to buy an indulgence for a dead relative who might be in purgatory or Hell and relieve that relative of his sins. By doing this you would be seen by the Catholic Church of committing a Christian act and this would elevate your status in the eyes of God.

Pilgrimages: These were very much supported by the Catholic Church as a pilgrim would end up at a place of worship that was owned by the Catholic Church and money could be made by the sale of badges, holy water, certificates to prove you had been etc. and completed your journey.
June VanDerMark

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#491381 Nov 13, 2013
ReginaM wrote:
<quoted text>
Unless one is born of water and the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Would that be (within the theology) the kingdom of JEHOVAH ... the one and only Abrahamic god in mythical existence???

Don't be SHY. You can say his real name. He likes the attention.

:)

“GOD SO LOVED US”

Since: Aug 08

He Gave His SON,JESUS Christ

#491382 Nov 13, 2013
Liam wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you sincerely search the truth yourself? There are wonderful Catholic websites that'll explain the Churchs teaching on limbo and purgatory.
But I can tell the Church teaches that the fate of all unbaptized people- including infants - is up to the hands of God. So obviously we can conclude the baby is in Heaven.
That's WHAT I SAID ..That I thought this was current teaching CLAY..
We went through this before --websites and all..no more LIMBO .

I WAS SAYING I BELUEVE the poster ..a Catholic ..is mistaken on when Dr said baptized babies will go to purgatory....even within the belief of HER OWN CHURCH ..She said purgatory NOT ME..

I was saying EXACTLY WHAT YOU JUST SAID ...You much tell your fellow Catholisc ..but that's up to you ..

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#491383 Nov 13, 2013
DeAngelo of Memphis wrote:
<quoted text>The systems of Earth are fixed, in my opinion by God. Everything in weather happens according to a pattern set from the beginning of the planet. Some areas are more prone to incur the more dangerous wraths of weather and weather does not discriminate. A typhoon can't help that people live in the path. The ocean needs to be cleaned whether it's someone on the beach or not. And hurricanes have hit the Americas since before there were inhabitants. These things are not gonna stop happening because they are part of a designed system. Man just have to prepare and deal with them.
Oh - so you think "God" likes to kill hundreds of thousands of people?.....and.....doesn't do anything to stop it.

Gotcha.

I will agree that the the cycles we see today, more than likely were cylces in the environment from previous eras.

You'll have to supply some sort of support to think it was "God".

Just because some guy wrote his opinion on the subject, doesn't make it true.

Unless you truly do believe men.

Do you?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#491384 Nov 13, 2013
June VanDerMark wrote:
The fact that male theologians always wrote of male saviors ought to put red flags up in all people that are willing to ask questions of the theologies.
Where are the female saviors??? WHERE??? And why can't the creator just as easily be female, as male???
Mythical JUNK!!!
The female savior elves are hard at work in the Falsehoof Factory in your head, you "Antidentite"

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) 9 hr Married in 10,657
News John Paul I Closer to Sainthood as Book Debunks... Nov 12 South Knox Hombre 1
News Vatican backs Obama as Nobel Peace Prize Winner (Oct '09) Nov 8 Feeling Abandoned 37
News Pope Francis to stop off in Cuba on way to Unit... (Apr '15) Nov 2 whirlignmerc 11
News War, religion and tolerance Oct 30 The Bible Student 1
News Pope Francis Denounces Gender Confirmation Surg... Oct '17 TerriB1 1
News Paul Is No Inventor of Christianity, Says Pope (Sep '08) Oct '17 The Bible Student 81
More from around the web