Roman Catholic church only true churc...

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 681754 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.

KayMarie

Carlisle, PA

#523404 Mar 21, 2014
Augustine's opinion of scripture (his own words)P:

What often is missed in these discussions about Augustine is his firm belief in THE INFALLIBILITY OF SCRIPTURE and in its clear teaching of creation ex nihilo (out of nothing). He wrote:“God didn’t find [some preexisting matter—BB], like something co-eternal with himself, out of which to construct the world; but he himself set it up from absolutely nothing”(Augustine, p. 151). He adamantly denied that any material thing existed before the creation week of Genesis 1:“And if the SACRED AND INFALLIBLE SCRIPTURES say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...it may be understood that he made nothing previously”(City of God, XI:6).

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#523405 Mar 21, 2014
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
If Blessed Mother Mary had any other kids, her desendants would be easy to find today. Unlike you and OGJ, the early Christians and Christians to this day honor, respect, and love her very highly. Most certainly, any Christian would have been very proud to be able to claim her as their earthly mother as well as their spiritual mother. However, no one has made any such claim. There is no family lineage traced back to her. None. Anywhere.
You know why? Because Mary didn't have any children other than Jesus.
I gave you truth from Scripture,,,,when you can understand it and accept it...get back to me,,

Repeat:
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:

It don't say the exact day/hour/second...but Joseph and Mary lived like any other married couple...they had kids.....you want to know their names????

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#523406 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>I agree. EVERY Christian knows that Jesus is the Foundation of the Church.
every catholic THINKS that peter is the foundation on which the church was built. but like you, they are liars and flakes
Preston

I am not sure of your answer....First you use Church with Jesus, then the church with peter....Perhaps its just a detail.

We all know how you think and feel about the RCC....maybe if someone said RCc, you would feel better/(smiles).

Don't you think some will be raptured out of the RCc? Check out Revelations.
Obviously, we are to come "out of religious" systems. But in the meantime, they are called churches here on earth, don't you think?( And doggone few are perfect, with perfect people in them.)
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#523407 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>I knew that but I wasn't certain that you did.
however the fact remains that he couldn't fight with one leopard or one man while tied up. the guy was a kook even in his imagination, and as I know, many of his writings were found not to be his. just another day in the life of Catholicism.
LOL...yeah, you "knew" that...

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#523408 Mar 21, 2014
Tango Bravo wrote:
<quoted text>
“Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? There is not one”(Job 14:4).
Are you saying that Jesus is unclean or are you saying that Mary is clean?
You and I are both sinners. The question at hand is where in Scripture does it say, "Mary is a sinner"? No where.
When you can use intelligence instead of senseless sarcasm get back to me.
I gave you truth,,,not sarcasm...go use your gloss...
guest

United States

#523409 Mar 21, 2014
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#523410 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>I also have said that Peter, PAUl and John and the greats in heaven knew me back in 1955. so what?
I didn't live during the time of the Writings, iggie did.
Yes, I have no doubt the saints in heaven know about you...they coined the term "kook" after you.

So if a Christian living during the period scripture was being written and they weren't mentioned by name, they didn't exist?
Just Sayin

Mount Juliet, TN

#523411 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>chill out stooped. the writers wrote the NT in Greek, so what their national language was is not and never has been the issue. Greek does have words for Brothers, sisters and cousins, and they never used the word for cousin when they spoke of His brotehrs and sisters.
and in fact, they wouldn't have called them even cousins, if they were in fact the earlier children of joseph. so don't be so dumb.
they KNEW THEM, FACE IT, THAT IS THE TRUTH.
WHAT PROBLEMS DO YOU BELEIVE THAT ARISES(I AM ASKING YOU, NOT SOME SOURCE OR LINK) IF MARY HAD OTHER CHILDREN?
OTHER THAN THE FACT THE WRITERS LIED.
IS THERE ANY OTHER LIES THAT YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE TEACHES?
You should just read the article in the link I sent you. I'm not going to type it up for you.

Anyway, you said:
"I also have said that Peter, PAUl and John and the greats in heaven knew me back in 1955. so what?"

Do tell! What happened?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#523412 Mar 21, 2014
Tango Bravo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure thing, Oxbow. You said it. All generations shall call Mary "blessed". It's you and OldJG who call Mary "sinner". Clearly neither of you conform to Scripture.
She was a sinner....pure and simple....per Scripture:
And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
Pure logic...she would not need a Saviour if she was sinless!!!!!

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#523413 Mar 21, 2014
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I was ONLY answering as to WHY John ...His,brother in Christ...was chosen for Mary ....
He,had already said WHO IS,MY BROTHER...
No matter if Mary had other children or not ..JOHN was brave and the most faithful of HIS BROTHERS present at the Crucifixion..the time in question..
It should not even be used as an argument for either side of this,debate IMO...
And I'm sure,Mary has,a,mansion as,befits,her in God's,eyes.....as do the apostles and all believers...the rest I leave to the end for answers...
RoSesz

Yes I understand. I was expanding out the thought of "when and where one comes and is found by Christ".

In another way, since we(in general I speak) think of John as the Apostle whom Jesus loved, and was so close to Him, then John becomes a model for us, as we are called to the Cross. And what happens to John, happens to us, as we are present with Jesus as he dies.

Jesus' relationship to each of the disciples was according to their need....Don't you think?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#523414 Mar 21, 2014
Tango Bravo wrote:
<quoted text>
Try to keep up, Oxbow. It isn't my unwillingness to accept your heretical retranslation of Scripture from English to Greek to heretical English that we're talking about here. You claim that a picture of the Pope kneeling in prayer in front of a statue or picture is proof that the Pope is worshiping a false idol instead of proof that the Pope is kneeling in front of a picture or statue while he prays to the one, true God.
Just answer the questions I pose below.
An idol is an object of worship, as though it were a god.
A picture is a picture.
A statue is a statue.
Kneeling in front of a picture or a statue while you pray to the one, true God is not anywhere near the same thing as worshiping a false idol.
Do you ever kneel while praying? Will you agree that everything in front of you is the false god you're praying to?
When you have answers to my questions get back to me.
Repeating your gibberish will not turn it into truth...

We already know, from your other postings, you are stupid...

You deny the definition of words by the English dictionary and use your gibberish instead...

When you can make any sport of sense, on any subject, get back to me

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#523415 Mar 21, 2014
RoSesz wrote:
<quoted text>
I was ONLY answering as to WHY John ...His,brother in Christ...was chosen for Mary ....
He,had already said WHO IS,MY BROTHER...
No matter if Mary had other children or not ..JOHN was brave and the most faithful of HIS BROTHERS present at the Crucifixion..the time in question..
It should not even be used as an argument for either side of this,debate IMO...
And I'm sure,Mary has,a,mansion as,befits,her in God's,eyes.....as do the apostles and all believers...the rest I leave to the end for answers...
The Problem: "Their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food." To be a widow in the first century was a very difficult journey. As a matter of fact, it was often difficult just to survive the most basic level of life. So it was[[ the responsibility of the church]]] to make sure that these widows were cared for, that they had shelter and food, that they were safe, and that they were protected.

none of her other children were members of the church at that time .

continued;Where did the Jews come up with the idea that widows were to be cared for? They were taught it by God. Our feministic society hates this, but I believe that Scripture tells us that God has designed women to be cared for by men. Women are to be under the protection, provision, and care of their father or husband. Women are nowhere in Scripture taught, in principle or example, that they are to provide for themselves. Woman are to be cared for.

This was a great sin in God's eyes, not to care for women who had no one to care for them. Women are always to be the special object of protection, provision, and care. And when they have no man (widows), they are under God's special care and protection.

And the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables.(Acts 6:2 NASB)

The apostles weren't saying that they were too good to take care of the widows, but that they had a different calling. Serving tables involved the organization and administration of ministry to the widows rather than simply serving as waiters or dispensers (cf. Matt. 21:12; Luke 19:23).

Notice that it says, "the twelve." That is the only time in the Book of Acts where they are called "the twelve." These "twelve"­the apostles­ had been commissioned by God to preach and teach to lay the foundation of the Church.
NOTICE THAT THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THESE WORDS ARE COMING FROM PETER, THE ALLEGED LEADER OF THE CHURCH AS catholics CLAIM

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#523416 Mar 21, 2014
Tango Bravo wrote:
<quoted text>
You're falling further and further and further behind, Oxbow, aka ITB.
I never claimed to be fluent in Koine Greek. I'm not interested in Koine Greek. Attempting to make meaningful translations from English into an alternate language when you aren't fluent in the alternate language is a waste of time at best.
During the time of Jesus the most important languages in Jerusalem would have been Aramaic, Hebrew, and Latin. Greek would have been known, but of lesser importance. Graves of women who died with an unborn child were marked using the word for "Firstborn". In any case, the language used would have been secondary to the locally accepted meaning of the word at the time.
During the time of Jesus "Firstborn" referred to legal/social standing.
In the time of Jesus the word we translate as "firstborn" was used not only to describe the son born before other sons but also used to describe a child who died because its mother died while the child was still in the womb.
When you can prove my info as being incorrect get back to me.
I repeat:

Thanks again for proving me correct!!!!

You are a liar.....you have no idea which Koine Greek word was used to translate to the English word firstborn, nor its definition...which is definitely not: "legal/social standing" nor is it "a child who died because its mother died while the child was still in the womb."

So then....you are a known stupid Catlik that is a liar...

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#523417 Mar 21, 2014
link.http://truekingdom.org/Ac ts/Acts%206-1-7.htm
Just Sayin

Mount Juliet, TN

#523418 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>I know how God thought about my mom because He told me that If I was half as faithful as her, he would be well pleased with me.lol
at no time have I stated that Mary was a bimbo, but I stand against the lies told by your church about her, for it is written that they worship the creation(mary) more than the Creator(Jesus).
the words that he gave me was to help you and people like you to realize the Truth, and nothing that I said was a lie. it is a shame that you accept the lie more than the Truth
Question
Help answer this question below.
Why do people find it easier to accept the lies then the truth.
Like
(8 people like this.)
Report
Share: Facebook Twitter Other
.
Sort answers by: Greatness / Likes Date submitted
Answers. 12 helpful answers below.
by mistje on July 31st, 2008
mistje .
I think people are sometimes afraid that facing the truth is too hard, so the lies are easier to accept.
Read more: Why do people find it easier to accept the lies then the truth.| Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/886365#ixzz2w...
So you think of your mother in a better light than you think of God's mother.
Your mother bore you, God's mother bore God. Quite a difference here.

Catholics do not nor have they ever worshiped Mary, much less have they worshiped her more than they worship God. This is true and will remain true no matter how many times Catholics are accused of it.
And all this aside, why do you, a protestant, have a problem with what Catholics believe, when protestants enjoy deciding whatever to believe according to how it suits them? They go church shopping until they find one that more or less goes along with what they have already decided to believe for themselves. Remember, there is no authority than the Bible?(According to how the individual interprets it). A family member of mine regularly goes to a Baptist church, yet he agrees with much of Calvinism. You know, it's a grab-bag pic-a-mix type deal. There is no absolute Truth in protestantland anyhow.
So just think of the Catholic Church as just another denomination and you won't have to get annoyed that we don't believe the same as you do. You don't get on the Methodist thread or the Mennonite thread or the Presbyterian thread and dedicate your life to "correcting" them, do you?

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#523419 Mar 21, 2014
Anthony MN wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL...yeah, you "knew" that...
I even" know "where you found it out.lol more catholic trash
ewtn.
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#523421 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>chill out stooped. the writers wrote the NT in Greek, so what their national language was is not and never has been the issue. Greek does have words for Brothers, sisters and cousins, and they never used the word for cousin when they spoke of His brotehrs and sisters.
and in fact, they wouldn't have called them even cousins, if they were in fact the earlier children of joseph. so don't be so dumb.
they KNEW THEM, FACE IT, THAT IS THE TRUTH.
WHAT PROBLEMS DO YOU BELEIVE THAT ARISES(I AM ASKING YOU, NOT SOME SOURCE OR LINK) IF MARY HAD OTHER CHILDREN?
OTHER THAN THE FACT THE WRITERS LIED.
IS THERE ANY OTHER LIES THAT YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE TEACHES?
I suggest you read through the link you were provided, it would clear up all your objections and keep you from constantly sinning by calling everyone a liar.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#523422 Mar 21, 2014
Tango Bravo wrote:
<quoted text>
Try to keep up, Oxbow. It isn't my unwillingness to accept your heretical retranslation of Scripture from English to Greek to heretical English that we're talking about here. You claim that a picture of the Pope kneeling in prayer in front of a statue or picture is proof that the Pope is worshiping a false idol instead of proof that the Pope is kneeling in front of a picture or statue while he prays to the one, true God.
Just answer the questions I pose below.
An idol is an object of worship, as though it were a god.
A picture is a picture.
A statue is a statue.
Kneeling in front of a picture or a statue while you pray to the one, true God is not anywhere near the same thing as worshiping a false idol.
Do you ever kneel while praying? Will you agree that everything in front of you is the false god you're praying to?
When you have answers to my questions get back to me.
We already know, from your other postings, you are stupid...

You deny the definition of words by the English dictionary and use your gibberish instead...
When you can make any sort of sense, on any subject, get back to me..
Just Sayin

Mount Juliet, TN

#523423 Mar 21, 2014
atemcowboy wrote:
<quoted text>and let add as I have stated several times on this forum. 8/25/82, I walked into the church where my mom was a charter member(at the age of 13), and when she knew I was there she came back and told me to come and get things right with God and she walked with me up to that altar where I gave my life to Him.
that is a great relationship, like that of Hannah giving her son to God.I would that you had the same and your mom could give you to God. and you received Salvation(not tap water salvation)
Well thanks for your concern, but you don't have to worry. I did the altar call bit and said the Jesus prayer decades ago. I still say it regularly everytime I go to Confession.
My parents (primarily my father) brought me up in the baptist church and I am deeply appreciative of that.
Anthony MN

Champlin, MN

#523424 Mar 21, 2014
KayMarie wrote:
Augustine's opinion of scripture (his own words)P:
What often is missed in these discussions about Augustine is his firm belief in THE INFALLIBILITY OF SCRIPTURE and in its clear teaching of creation ex nihilo (out of nothing). He wrote:“God didn’t find [some preexisting matter—BB], like something co-eternal with himself, out of which to construct the world; but he himself set it up from absolutely nothing”(Augustine, p. 151). He adamantly denied that any material thing existed before the creation week of Genesis 1:“And if the SACRED AND INFALLIBLE SCRIPTURES say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...it may be understood that he made nothing previously”(City of God, XI:6).
Sounds right to me.

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 Vatican backs Obama as Nobel Peace Prize Winner (Oct '09) Jun 19 Dementia mental c... 36
News Gregory: Bishops - can never say we are sorry e... Jun 18 Listen to the Word 1
News Pat Robertson Is Birth Control (Nov '14) Jun 13 Donald Scampi 2
News United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Jun 12 Married in 10,558
News Why Melania Trump covers her head one day and n... Jun 8 lavon affair 10
News How the war-of-words between Trump and Pope Fra... Jun 8 USS LIBERTY 9
News What Divides Catholics and Protestants? (Apr '08) Jun 7 princess_noochie 84,749
More from around the web