Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Full story: CBC News 568,395
The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ. Full Story
USA Born

Upland, CA

#551121 Jul 23, 2014
hojo wrote:
<quoted text>
And you are falsely misguided with your bible only anti-catholic man-made contradicting denomination beliefs that total more than 42,200 inconsistent and chaotic (personal interpretations) of the bible....
You wouldn't know what interpretation is correct because you don't read the Bible. It's how church leaders keep their lies and legends goiing . People like you will suck down anything if it somehow proves them superior. Your anti-scripture, ritual only beliefs have left you ignorant and judgemental of anyone who dares to read and study the scriptures. People like you will always feel the need to be superior to others in some form or another.

There is actually less than 42,000 non catholic denominations. But who cares. It does not mean that all these different denominations do not agree that.

Matthew 16:16 Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

No rituals or traditions needed.

John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#551122 Jul 23, 2014
Chess wrote:
<quoted text>
When you get some truth rather than nonsense, let me know.
\\

Absolute truth....no nonsense...you got it!!! Here tis!!!

You cannot refute truth...but...keep on keeping on..

Now you know why I call you lying snake...

Not so....Requirements need to be met to be so guilty....Per your post. A requirement to be guilty is:"pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own". Never did...not guilty..

If I said "Here are my words" and then posted info from an article on the net...I would be guilty as charged...and it would be easy to prove...by you simply using your search engine...

That never happened and never will..

theft: 1.(Law) criminal law the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession..
Not guilty....

thief: a person who steals something from another

Not guilty...it never happened...

Since: Feb 14

Location hidden

#551123 Jul 23, 2014
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
For the same reason that members of the clergy molested and still molest children. Human nature will not BE denied its self-centered pleasures.
The only difference between humans and non-human animals is that humans by far are more manipulative.
An example is the USE of religion. Woman of religion (for instance) have abortions, yet go sit in the pews in churches pretending they would NEVER stoop so low as to have abortions. They want to "save FACE" ... not "GRACE."
The confessional was/is used a lot by the members of the mafia, and the members of Catholic clergy ... hoping in VAIN that Jesus would do for them what they could not or would not do for their selves.
We all want our scapegoats and religion (and YOUR favorite word "spirituality") is high on the list concerning scapegoating.
More BS coming from someone it took 70 years to " escape "
I think it's you hoping in vain June..
Hell is no more used as a scare tactic for children as it is for adults or the number of Christians would have dropped drastically as they became adults..
Yuns think a Christian becomes discouraged because atheist say there is no God.
I've been on this thread for pretty much a year now and I wonder how many converts you have compared to Christianity..
I SUGGEST very few..
you're nothing but a disgruntled OSAS Christian..
I SUGGEST they're very very few true atheist, meaning no religion whatsoever at or during anytime In their lives..

watch this clown

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#551124 Jul 23, 2014
Chess wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course you don't,'tard.
Their fathers abandoned them.

Give me the names of "their"...
USA Born

Upland, CA

#551125 Jul 23, 2014
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
What was meant by "only true church" was that the Catholic Church is the one which was established by Jesus. Meaning that in Her is the entire Deposit of Faith.
Other churches may have varying amounts of the Deposit of Faith, but not the entire Deposit.
So, why just have some when you could have it all?
That's what I don't get. Protestants act like the CC is literally satan when they have the CC to thank for their Bibles and their belief in the Trinity.
It comes down to believeing the scriptures or believing the CC.

Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Galatians 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)

Romans 15:20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:

Can you show me how the scriptures and the teachings of the CC are in agreement here? It clearly says Paul took the Gospel to the gentiles.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#551126 Jul 23, 2014
Chess wrote:
<quoted text>
Incorrect.
M-W made no such determination. They could not. A fair use determination depends on the use for which the material is employed.
An advance determination is not possible.
Now you know why I call you a 'tard, eh,'tard?
No advance determination...their stand was/is based on them applying the law to their situation...logic says this came about from lawyers they hired to advise them...

Merriam-Webster have determined that by applying the law to their situation, their material is not fair use....that is why they say " All rights reserved. No part of the work embodied in Merriam-Webster's pages on the World Wide Web and covered by the copyrights hereon may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, taping, or information storage and retrieval systems—without the written permission of the publisher.

Requests for permission to use or reproduce should be mailed to: Permissions Editor, Merriam-Webster Inc., P.O. Box 281, Springfield, MA

You ain't got permission...

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#551127 Jul 23, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is materialism "random chaos"? Where did you get that idea from?
Hidingfromyou

I gave you an either/or situation, one in which the world is symmetric(super), or chaotic.

A materialist depends on matter, and matter is made up of atoms, protons, the basic standard model with the discovery of the Higgs particle, with its approximate weight.

Although theoretical physics more or less is at a crossroads between supersymmetry and chaos as the basis of matter, I was interested in which direction you lean?

Of course there is always a third unknown in this.....

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#551128 Jul 23, 2014
Chess wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been over this,'tard.
They lawyer in the cited case made no such claim yet was disciplined for plagiarism:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DzP9O2hmo...
'Tard.
I know we have been over this again and again...I keep hoping that some day you will see the truth..

I got this info from you!!!! It clearly spells out a particular requirement for there to be something plagiarized...."pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own". Never did...not guilty..

This example clarifies the truth in the info you provided!!!!
If I said "Here are my words" and then posted info from an article on the net...I would be guilty as charged...and it would be easy to prove...by you simply using your search engine...

That never happened and never will..

For a theft to have occurred you have to prove the property was taken with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession..that never happened!!!!! The websites still have their info!!!!!

Not guilty...

Since: Dec 06

Location hidden

#551129 Jul 23, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
All deities are imagined beings. Sure, you really really believe in yours - just like every believer in every religion. Your religions are mutually exclusive. You and they both cannot be right. So you're stuck with these two choices:
- either only one religion is true and all other religions false
- or all religions are false
Given that humans evolved from animals, that not all human groups have religious systems (some don't believe in afterlives, some not in anything "supernatural"), that many religious systems are mutually exclusive, that all religions have equal evidence to their claims - that is to say, none whatsoever - that none of us have access to objective reality and that all people experience subjective realities, that "how to interact with and understand the world around us" differs culturally and throughout history, it's most likely all religions are false and no deities exist.
You are welcome to believe that your religion is, against all odds, the "one true religion," but nothing could be more arrogant, presumptuous, ethnocentric, conceited, unempathetic and infantile. Where did you get this special knowledge?
Not from spirituality - other religions have spiritual experiences and atheists can, too.
Not from miracles - other religions have miracles.
Not from prophecy - other religions have prophecy and fulfilled prophecy.
So your certainty that you are correct exists simply because of your enculturation into your religion and production and reproduction of your lived subjective reality.
Hindingfromyou

All of this would be true unless God transcends human imagination.(As well as other spiritual beings). So for merely a belief in a deity, as you say this would be true.

Remember there is a difference between faith and belief, as I described before.

It is not that I say that I am right or correct in my beliefs,(which change with experience), rather it is faith which is unchanged, that makes difficult for you to prove your case of presumption. Since presumptions are at times not built on observable phenomena, such as faith, hope and love.
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#551130 Jul 23, 2014
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
If they don't follow Catholic doctrines, then they are not Catholics. Period.
They are protestants and might as well find the nearest exit and head down the street for a church where they can feel nice and comfy in.
The CC is never going to just pull up Her anchor and "go with the flow" just because some "polls" indicate that "most" "Catholics" don't believe in Catholic doctrines!
Why are people still standing around expecting that to happen?
....what's the point in having rules/regulations/canon laws if there is no deterrent to those belonging to the church who break them? The catholic church says divorce is wrong and you cannot dissolve the sacrament of marriage (sounds serious!) yet all are welcome and no penalty is applied.

.....Most catholics practice forms of birth control, the church screams Wrong!, Sinful! but step right up and come to our church your more than welcome.

.....The church makes all these rules/moral judgments but hey! We love ya just the same......see you on Sunday!

....If the church wants to get serious about who's in and who isn't, start kicking people out, then you might have a church for those who actually are serious about following the rules and what the church stands for.
Just Sayin

Antioch, TN

#551131 Jul 23, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
It comes down to believeing the scriptures or believing the CC.
Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Galatians 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
Romans 15:20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:
Can you show me how the scriptures and the teachings of the CC are in agreement here? It clearly says Paul took the Gospel to the gentiles.
Which Catholic teachings are you talking about?
What do these verses mean to you? How do you imagine Catholic teachings being contrary to them?

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#551132 Jul 23, 2014
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
"Does the word Demiurge mean anything to your Gnosticized mentality?"
It does - it is a term used by the Gnostics that explains that the Jewish God was an image of the "true god" - whereas the "true God" is "unknown" and "unnamed" in regards to what men can see and describe.
Idiot!!!

If the supposed true god is unknowable ... then humans can't possibly know whether or not it even exists.

The monotheistic god of the Jews was created in Jewish imagination long before the gods of the Christian Gnostics were created in Christian Gnostic imagination.

Just because you have an over-active imagination in which you invest FAITH, doesn't mean that I should depend on your imagination to feed me what you are certain is universal truth.

That's WAY TOO MUCH to expect of others.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#551133 Jul 23, 2014
Just Sayin wrote:
<quoted text>
What was meant by "only true church" was that the Catholic Church is the one which was established by Jesus.
It was established by men who wrote the Jesus MYTH.

I suggest you should stop fantasizing that a Jew is smitten with YOU.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#551134 Jul 23, 2014
pusherman_ wrote:
<Hell is no more used as a scare tactic for children as it is for adults or the number of Christians would have dropped drastically as they became adults..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =srHHUs2uRnIXX
So if you don't believe in hell, evil or a devil ... why are you quoting scriptures from a Christian bible that does promote the concept of a hell, evil and a devil that in turn frightens believers into submission???

If religion just promoted the idea that a god exists who will welcome all human-souls to states of eternal bliss ... you ... nor anyone else would preach warnings of ILL-BODING AT others ... as you would all be perceived as being equal in worth TO the creator.

That proves you are frightened that if you leave religion ... YOU will be CURSED with eternal torment.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#551135 Jul 23, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
It comes down to believeing the scriptures or believing the CC.
Does it make a difference on either?

Both were written by men. So in essence - you are believing men and what they say to believe.

Please post where "God" specifically states which texts are of "His inspiration" and which are not.

Please be specific.

FYI - 2 Tim 3:16 is not by "God", n or by "Paul", so that text is not a valid source. Besides, if you were to use this passage as a source - it says "ALL SCRIPTURES" - so that would mean that you will have to determine which so-called "scriptures" are from "God" and which are not, unless all texts - canonical as well as non-canonical, are included.

Men dictated only what they have decided upon and not what "God" decided, so using 2 Tim would be good, because it is not "by God".

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#551136 Jul 23, 2014
USA Born wrote:
<quoted text>
It comes down to believeing the scriptures or believing the CC.
Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Galatians 2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
Romans 15:20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:
Can you show me how the scriptures and the teachings of the CC are in agreement here? It clearly says Paul took the Gospel to the gentiles.
Do you think "Paul" was more enlightened than Jesus? If you don't, then why don't you quote Jesus and what he states concerning the passages by "Paul" that you have used above.

HINT: "Paul" promoted his own gospel.
Just Sayin

Antioch, TN

#551137 Jul 23, 2014
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
....what's the point in having rules/regulations/canon laws if there is no deterrent to those belonging to the church who break them? The catholic church says divorce is wrong and you cannot dissolve the sacrament of marriage (sounds serious!) yet all are welcome and no penalty is applied.
.....Most catholics practice forms of birth control, the church screams Wrong!, Sinful! but step right up and come to our church your more than welcome.
.....The church makes all these rules/moral judgments but hey! We love ya just the same......see you on Sunday!
....If the church wants to get serious about who's in and who isn't, start kicking people out, then you might have a church for those who actually are serious about following the rules and what the church stands for.
There is no outward deterrent such as a police force and no physical penalty such as jail time or fines.
Again, one cannot really be a Catholic if one does not agree to Catholic doctrine. It’s simple as that.
The Church does not kick people out. It does not police the members. It assumes that everyone belongs and assumes those who are there want to be there out of love of God and neighbor. And so assumes that they are following the commandments to the best of their ability.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#551138 Jul 23, 2014
Robert F wrote:
<quoted text>
...... observable phenomena, such as faith, hope and love.
How is "faith" - not the person - observable? If by actions of a person - then how? What does a person have to do, in order for another to observe "faith"?

"Hope" is a conscious thought pattern that is invoked when some one "thinks' with their mind. How is that observable? Does someone have to watch the person's eyes and nose for action?

"Love" is observable, but only when acts of this emotion are applied. "Love" itself is an intangible emotion that is more of a reactionary modal than observable.

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#551139 Jul 23, 2014
Imagination is a very handy TOOL ... but it should never be trusted as leading self to truth. It's simply a play-THINK.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >

Gnosticism

Introduction to Gnosticism for Beginners

Dualism

Dualism, roughly speaking, posits the existence of two creators. The first is a god of goodness and pure spirituality (often called the Godhead), while the second (often called the demiurge) is the creator of the physical world, which has trapped divine souls in mortal form.

http://altreligion.about.com/od/alternativere...

Since: Sep 09

Prince George, Canada

#551140 Jul 23, 2014
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it make a difference on either?
Both were written by men.
Who do you TRUST wrote Gnostic Christian literature ... PIGS???

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
United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) Wed 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
Pope's visit will change Philippines, Cardinal ... Jan 19 MS_Singapore 42
More from around the web