A Simple Yet Irrefutable Reason The Catholic church Is Not Rooted In Christ's Church

[Phoneman777]

I’m not catholic. You can have a hay day with their beliefs and rituals...
I don’t follow them or agree with them.
They take credit for the early Church...
Along with that goes the credit for early Corruption.
Just saying.

Isn’t it our obligation to not only show sinners their need for a Christ, but also to help believers trapped in false systems?

 

[BreadOfLife]

“In all things showing yourself a pattern of good works: in doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity, Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.” (Titus 2:7-8)

You make it so that unbelievers have opportunity to speak evil of you without shame.

Why? Because I rebuke snarky comments like yours?
Because I expose people like YOU?
You want to say whatever you want about Catholics with impunity and without any consequence.
That’s why I’m here.

You even quote Scripture in an effort to justify your sin.
Pathetic . . .

 

[Phoneman777]

Yes!

The current discipline in the Church is to fast (in one way or another) on Fridays.
Attending the Celebration of the Eucharist is available every day of course, and Sunday, the whole community gathers to celebrate Eucharist, and Christ Risen from the dead! The eighth day.. The first day of the new creation..

Pax et Bonum

The only problem with that idea is that we CAN’T observe any day as “holy” that God first didn’t make “holy”.

The only day God made holy is the 7th, and commanded that days 1-6 be work days so we wouldn’t confuse the issue

 

[BarneyFife]

Hey...post #87...didn’t you see BOL’s demand, that YOU are responsible and must be accountable for every Protestant Churches Teaching?

Funny, I never notice YOU taking on that responsibility... LOL

.
.
Well, you know how ME is.
.
.

 

[Phoneman777]

Why? Because I rebuke snarky comments like yours?
Because I expose people like YOU?
You want to say whatever you want about Catholics with impunity and without any consequence.
That’s why I’m here.

You even quote Scripture in an effort to justify your sin.
Pathetic . . .

Hi BOL, I’ve wondered how it is that Catholicism claims to be “above the Bible” yet points to the Bible as the claimed authority which establishes her superiority to it.

Isn’t that akin to a Catch 22?

 

[Michiah-Imla]

Because I rebuke snarky comments like yours?

I already knew your church was unbiblical.

The fruit being produced by one of it’s members is confirmation.

 

[Alfredthefifth]

​

WRONG.

Paul explicitly teaches that the ORAL traditions are as binding as Scripture, what is written.
2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a LETTER from us."

You can try to weasel your way around this unti verse the COWS come home and you’re Still be wrong.
What you WON’T find is a similar verse that teaches exclusively that Scripture is our ONLY Authority.

Where have YOU been for the last 2000 years??

It’s not ME or the existing Bishops who are pulling these Traditions out of thin air.
We have a PAPER TRAIL that foes ALL the way back to the beginning called the Apostolic Fathers.

These are men who were the first disciples of the Apostles. Men like Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp, who passed them onto THEIR successors.

Tell me something –
WHY was Oral Tradition okay for the Jews in the OT – but is forbidden for Christians in the NT?

I’ll wait here for your answer . . .

Mark Chapter 7

Jesus, is showing the Pharisees and all Jews that the traditions of men, sacred holy traditions of men. Violate the laws they are supposed to uphold.

Colossians 2 read it all but highlighting verse 8

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy,
WHICH DEPENDS ON HUMAN TRADITIONS and elemental spiritual forces of this world
RATHER THAN ON CHRIST.

The RCC, has many to many traditions that support the RCC as total authority that are little more than human traditions.

The wall between simple faith in Christ built of these RCC traditions is a solid and tangible as the traditional Jewish laws that Christ highlights in Mathew 7.

my RCC friends here throw out their Spiritual TRADITION, backed up by choicely selected verses. Verses that in chapter and book cannot mean what they are being used to mean.

So as I did above can you post the chapter the whole chapter that a verse is in and show how it works.

Throwing 20 40 in one case 72 individual verses out of order let alone out of context is quite simply trying to baffle the audience. Manure in it's most colorful term, as in baffling with bs, is what I am getting from the died in wool RCCs here.

So lets keep it simple
Highlight a verse and then use the entire chapter to prove it.

One chapter per post with one highlighted verse per post.

The 20, 40 and 70 verses per post is quite simply used to overwhelm everyone with B S!

Alfredthefifth

 

[Taken]

Isn’t it our obligation to not only show sinners their need for a Christ, but also to help believers trapped in false systems?

Right to Speak on Behalf of the Lord God, according to His Word. Yes.
Right to Disagree with what others claim. Yes.
Obligation to make others listen or hear. No.

Some people take issue with you, some with Catholics, some with Protestants, some with Muslims, some with Hindus’ etc. etc.

And even within those “groups” are umpteen individuals with individual views and beliefs.

So happens, Muslims, Hindu’s, Catholics, Some Protestants...
Have a BIG mission statement (so to speak), A huge billboard (so to speak)...
Glaring Laundry list of requirements to be “acceptably labeled”...under their Religious “identifier NAME”.

Which is where (IMO), the outside of Scripture is Promoted and Festers and Expands as men take turns being the Appointed Spokesman for ...That Religious Organization ... and seemingly DRIFTS into the Congregations mind-set of being “Scripturally Required”...but really isn’t.
SO unappealing to me. And SO obvious, the crux of numerous debates.

Have to say, the Catholics, (while boasting longevity of their Organization), also have the most bizarre outside of Scriptures, teachings and rituals, that seemingly are requirements to be “acceptably labeled” under their Religious “identifier NAME”.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

Quote from “Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp” referring to Mary as “Queen of the Universe” or “Co-redemptrix” as they preserve the Apostolic oral tradition.

Very interesting, the supposed “Apostolic oral tradition” about Mary was so supposedly highlighted, orally, in Great Detail, that when Mentioning Mary IN Scripture, not ONE of those supposed oral traditions was even slightly hinted or recorded IN Scripture by a single Apostle.

Sounds more like a preservation of man-made ideologies tagging the ideologies with the name Apostolic, to imply validity via the Apostles, who in fact taught no such things about Mary.

 

[Philip James]

The only problem with that idea is that we CAN’T observe any day as “holy” that God first didn’t make “holy”.

The only day God made holy is the 7th, and commanded that days 1-6 be work days so we wouldn’t confuse the issue

Jesus made every day holy, through His Incarnation..

Youre just flinging mud hoping something will stick because you cant possibly cone up with an alternative to the offering of the Eucharist as the fulfillment of Malachi 1:11..

Pax et Bonum

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hi BOL, I’ve wondered how it is that Catholicism claims to be “above the Bible” yet points to the Bible as the claimed authority which establishes her superiority to it.

Isn’t that akin to a Catch 22?

And I’d like for YOU to show me where the Catholic Church officially claims to be “above the Bible”.

You made this idiotic claim several posts bad – for which NALILED you on it – and you have YET to respond.
So – instead of doubling down ono your LIE – why don’t you present the official Church document that teaches this nonsense?

 

[BreadOfLife]

I already knew your church was unbiblical.
The fruit being produced by one of it’s members is confirmation.

So, by that idiotic standard – EVERY Protestant faction that has a single person in t it that bears “bad fruit” in YOUR opinion is “Unbiblical”??

Does that mean that Jesus was a false messiah for choosing Judas?
Your ignorance of Scripture matches your ignorance of Christ . . .

 

[atpollard]

Hello atpollard,

No, we have something far better than just our sacred texts, we have the 2000 year old living community founded by Christ through His apostles,
and of course, best of all, we have the ONE cup and the ONE bread that Jesus gave to the apostles 'when the hour had come'
The Bread of Life, come down from heaven, the Cup of Salvation..
The Groom offering Himself to His bride, and she receiving Him..

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding Feast of the Lamb of God!

Pax et Bonum

Matthew 12:33
I cannot "venerate" the Queen of the Universe, so I must go elsewhere to find the True Church where I can worship God.

In necessariis unitas, in non-necessariis libertas, in omnibus caritas.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Mark Chapter 7
Jesus, is showing the Pharisees and all Jews that the traditions of men, sacred holy traditions of men. Violate the laws they are supposed to uphold.
Colossians 2 read it all but highlighting verse 8
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy,
WHICH DEPENDS ON HUMAN TRADITIONS and elemental spiritual forces of this world
RATHER THAN ON CHRIST.

WRONG.

Marlk 7 doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with SACRED Tradition. It has to do with menial, secondary traditions that the Pharisees places as much importance on as the SACRED Traditions and Written Word.
Your grasp of CONTEXT is as warped as your understanding of Christ.

The RCC, has many to many traditions that support the RCC as total authority that are little more than human traditions.

The wall between simple faith in Christ built of these RCC traditions is a solid and tangible as the traditional Jewish laws that Christ highlights in Mathew 7.
my RCC friends here throw out their Spiritual TRADITION, backed up by choicely selected verses. Verses that in chapter and book cannot mean what they are being used to mean.
So as I did above can you post the chapter the whole chapter that a verse is in and show how it works.
Throwing 20 40 in one case 72 individual verses out of order let alone out of context is quite simply trying to baffle the audience. Manure in it's most colorful term, as in baffling with bs, is what I am getting from the died in wool RCCs here.
So lets keep it simple
Highlight a verse and then use the entire chapter to prove it.
One chapter per post with one highlighted verse per post.
The 20, 40 and 70 verses per post is quite simply used to overwhelm everyone with B S!
Alfredthefifth

No problem – just as soon as YOU show me where the Catholic Church’s “many traditions that support the RCC as total authority that are little more than human traditions.”

Your claims are stupid and unfounded – so you’re HARDLY in a position to demand anything from me until you prove them.

 

[Philip James]

Hi BOL, I’ve wondered how it is that Catholicism claims to be “above the Bible” yet points to the Bible as the claimed authority which establishes her superiority to it.

Isn’t that akin to a Catch 22?

You are mistaken. The Church's authority was established by Christ, through the apostles. The scriptures make this clear..

Pax et Bonum

 

[Philip James]

Matthew 12:33
I cannot "venerate" the Queen of the Universe, so I must go elsewhere to find the True Church where I can worship God.

No one is 'required' to venerate Mary and the Saints. Although I would argue it is right and just that we do so.

Why then must you go elsewhere?

In necessariis unitas, in non-necessariis libertas, in omnibus caritas.

Indeed. All the more reason not to abandon the unity of the Church because of your brethrens devotions..

Pax et Bonum

 

[atpollard]

No one is 'required' to venerate Mary and the Saints.

In the Catechism for Inquirers, there is a discussion about what one must affirm to become a Catholic.
If I wanted to lie about my beliefs, I would have remained a Nihilist and saved the tithe.

I would not affirm beliefs that contradicted what I read based on some alleged mythological Tradition that renders the Bible worthless as a source for knowable Truth. If God's word cannot be read and understood, then we do not know anything about God ... we only know the rumors that we have been told about God. As a former ATHEIST, Truth is important to me. I will believe whatever can stand the test of Truth and Scripture has a better track record than any other source.

 

[Philip James]

If God's word cannot be read and understood, then we do not know anything about God ..

Hello atpollard,

Who says it can't?
But are we humble enough to check our understanding against what our brothers and sisters have understood and lived for 2000 years?

'Lo, I am with you, even until the end of the age'

In the Catechism for Inquirers, there is a discussion about what one must affirm to become a Catholic.

Which things that you must affirm do you have a problem with?

Pax et Bonum

 

[atpollard]

Hello atpollard,

Who says it can't?
But are we humble enough to check our understanding against what our brothers and sisters have understood and lived for 2000 years?

'Lo, I am with you, even until the end of the age'



Which things that you must affirm do you have a problem with?

Pax et Bonum

Bible says "BROTHERS" & Church says "PERPETUAL VIRGIN".
What else in the Bible does not mean what it says?
"FORGIVEN", "ETERNAL LIFE", "NEVER LEAVE YOU"?

The RCC opens Pandora's Box and now ... only a PRIEST can understand Truth. We must accept RUMORS from men (who shuffle molesters around to protect "The Church"). There is an insurmountable and innate credibility-gap inherent in the conflict between the "plain words" and the "sacred tradition".

Jesus said that "power" in His Church would not be like the Gentile Rulers or the Priests and Scribes that love the honor and place themselves above the "flock" ... then the RCC builds a hierarchy EXACTLY like the Gentiles and Priests that Jesus condemned. The rejection of "Church Hierarchy" is one of those Baptist Distinctives that come directly from what Jesus said and the "bad example" provided by the historic RCC and Lutheran State Church and Anglican State Church. We Baptists may screw up, but we will not repeat YOUR screw up ... we will make new ones of our own.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Bible says "BROTHERS" & Church says "PERPETUAL VIRGIN".
What else in the Bible does not mean what it says?
"FORGIVEN", "ETERNAL LIFE", "NEVER LEAVE YOU"?

Utter nonsense based on your personal ignorance of the languages used in the Bible.
Time for a Bible Language Lesson . . .

In the Bible - the Greek words for “brother” (adelphos) and “adelphoi” were used much more liberally than the normal meaning. It was applied to half-brothers, step-brothers, ousins, uncles, nephews, fellow believers, etc. The Aramaic word , “ach”, encompasses the meanings for brother of same parents, half-brother (same father), relative, kinship, same tribe, and even a fellow countryman.

In the Septuagint, in Gen. 14:14, Lot is called Abraham’s "brother" (adelphos), even though he was the his nephew (Gen. 11:26–28).

In Gen. 29:15, Jacob is referred to as the "brother" (adelphos) of his uncle Laban.

Brothers Kish and Eleazar were the sons of Mahli. Kish had sons of his own, but Eleazar’s daughters married their "brother" (adelphoi),, the sons of Kish - who were actually their cousins (1 Chr. 23:21–22).

As a matter of fact - there are 344 instances are instances where the word “Adelphos” and all of its variations are used in the NT.
41 times (12%) are cases where "Adelphos" clearly or probably refers to a family sibling.
47 instances (14%) are cases where "Adelphos" may or may not refer to a family sibling.
256 instances (74%) are cases where "Adelphos" cannot or almost certainly does NOT refer to a family sibling.

Here is some MORE bad news for Catholic-haters like YOU . . .

As to the “named brethren” of Jesus - Matt. 27:56 says, "…among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee".

Mark 15:40 states, "There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joses, and Salome").

Finally, John 19:25 states, "But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene".

When you compare the different accounts of the crucifixion, they clearly show the mother of James and Joseph to be the wife of Clopas (also called, Alphaeus) – not Mary, the Mother of Jesus. Any attempt to connect these people as uterine brothers of Jesus are SQUASHED by the Bible.

Now how about YOU showing me a single verse that says Mary was the mother of Somebody OTHER than Jesus??

The RCC opens Pandora's Box and now ... only a PRIEST can understand Truth. We must accept RUMORS from men (who shuffle molesters around to protect "The Church"). There is an insurmountable and innate credibility-gap inherent in the conflict between the "plain words" and the "sacred tradition".

Maybe YOU should worry about the very SAME sex problem going on in YOUR sect before you start pointing fingers . . .
Southern Baptists Apologize For Sex Abuse Coverups
How Protestant Churches Hid Sexual Abuse ...
A History of Sex Abuse in the Protestant Imagination
FAQ: Sexual Abuse by Protestant Clergy - The Doan Law Firm
1 in 10 Young Protestants Have Left a Church Over Abuse
Evangelicals ‘worse’ than Catholics on sexual abuse
Evangelical Sex Abuse Record ‘Worse’ Than Catholic, Says Billy Graham’s Grandson
Protestants can no longer dismiss abuse as a ‘Catholic problem’
Child Sex Abuse More Prevalent Among Protestants Than Among Catholics
There Is More Sexual Abuse In The Protestant Churches Than Catholic
Data Shed Light on Child Sexual Abuse by Protestant Clergy
Denial About Sexual Abuse In Evangelical Churches