Church

[VictoryinJesus]

Jesus is to be the Head, so what kind of a Body should anyone expect?

What kind of body should one expect?

 

[BreadOfLife]

sure, i agree, and i don't care if ppl want to venerate Peter, works for me. I'd be more impressed if JFK were officially Sanctified, or even if all of you militant Catholics would have made some noise after the inevitable assassination, where were all of you then lol, but whatever.

As to the bottom part, the popular knowledge has it that the RCC restricted the owning of Bibles, and even killed people for looking at one, and if that is not true--which i doubt that it is completely untrue, do you?--then you just have another lie to surmount. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Inquisitions were being exaggerated, too.

but really what we are attempting to do here is mix cultures, and imo no good can come of this.
Good fences make good neighbors, move boundary stones at your peril, however you want to put it.

First of all - "veneration" of Peter has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Jesus called him "Kepha."
Denial is the only reason anybody would reject this Scriptural fact.

Finally - you should know better that to believe in "popular knowledge" without researching it.
The plain fact of the matter is that about 85% of the general public was functionally illiterate before the 19th century and would have had zero use for owning a Bible.

That comes to my next point that Bibles before the invention of the printing press in the 15th century were handwritten. This made them extremely difficult to come by - not to mention very expensive. MOST people couldn't afford one.
Bibles were chained to the pulpits of Churches because of this.

Finally - there is not ONE single documented case of a person being executed for "looking" at a Bible.
That's just another anti-Catholic falsehood that YOU have been weaned on.

 

[bbyrd009]

Denial is the only reason anybody would reject this Scriptural fact.

exactly my position @ "Get behind Me, Satan" though, see.

The plain fact of the matter is that about 85% of the general public was functionally illiterate before the 19th century and would have had zero use for owning a Bible.

ha tbh i'm not convinced the ratio has improved much since then

 

[bbyrd009]

Finally - there is not ONE single documented case of a person being executed for "looking" at a Bible.

please, it has been going on since forever, here, wade through these and get back to me: ps, this is why it's pointless to debate with you

(1) In the year 1215 Pope Innocent III issued a law commanding “that they shall be seized for trial and penalties, WHO ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE SACRED VOLUMES, or who hold secret conventicles, or who assume the office of preaching without the authority of their superiors; against whom process shall be commenced, without any permission of appeal” (J.P. Callender, Illustrations of Popery, 1838, p. 387). Innocent “declared that as by the old law, the beast touching the holy mount was to be stoned to death, so simple and uneducated men were not to touch the Bible or venture to preach its doctrines” (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, VI, p. 723).

(2) The Council of Toulouse (1229) FORBADE THE LAITY TO POSSESS OR READ THE VERNACULAR TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE (Allix, Ecclesiastical History, II, p. 213). This council ordered that the bishops should appoint in each parish “one priest and two or three laics, who should engage upon oath to make a rigorous search after all heretics and their abettors, and for this purpose should visit every house from the garret to the cellar, together with all subterraneous places where they might conceal themselves” (Thomas M’Crie, History of the Reformation in Spain, 1856, p. 82). They also searched for the illegal Bibles.

(3) The Council of Tarragona (1234) “ORDERED ALL VERNACULAR VERSIONS TO BE BROUGHT TO THE BISHOP TO BE BURNED” (Paris Simms, Bible from the Beginning, p. 1929, 162).

(4) In 1483 the infamous Inquisitor General Thomas Torquemada began his reign of terror as head of the Spanish Inquisition; King Ferdinand and his queen “PROHIBITED ALL, UNDER THE SEVEREST PAINS, FROM TRANSLATING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES, OR FROM USING IT WHEN TRANSLATED BY OTHERS” (M’Crie, p. 192). For more than three centuries the Bible in the common tongue was a forbidden book in Spain and multitudes of copies perished in the flames, together with those who cherished them.

(5) In England, too, laws were passed by the Catholic authorities against vernacular Bibles. The Constitutions of Thomas Arundel, issued in 1408 by the Archbishop of Canterbury, made this brash demand: “WE THEREFORE DECREE AND ORDAIN THAT NO MAN SHALL, HEREAFTER, BY HIS OWN AUTHORITY, TRANSLATE ANY TEXT OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO ENGLISH, OR ANY OTHER TONGUE, by way of a book, libel, or treatise, now lately set forth in the time of John Wyckliff, or since, or hereafter to be set forth, in part of in whole, privily or apertly, upon pain of greater excommunication, until the said translation be allowed by the ordinary of the place, or, if the case so require, by the council provincial” (John Eadie, The English Bible, vol. 1, 1876, p. 89). Consider Arundel’s estimation of the man who gave the English speaking people their first Bible: “This pestilential and most wretched John Wycliffe of damnable memory, a child of the old devil, and himself a child or pupil of Anti-Christ, who while he lived, walking in the vanity of his mind … crowned his wickedness by translating the Scriptures into the mother tongue” (Fountain, John Wycliffe, p. 45).

 

[bbyrd009]

(6) Pope Leo X (1513-1521), who railed against Luther’s efforts to follow the biblical precept of faith alone and Scripture alone, called the fifth Lateran Council (1513-1517), which charged that no books should be printed except those approved by the Roman Catholic Church. “THEREFORE FOREVER THEREAFTER NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PRINT ANY BOOK OR WRITING WITHOUT A PREVIOUS EXAMINATION, TO BE TESTIFIED BY MANUAL SUBSCRIPTION, BY THE PAPAL VICAR AND MASTER OF THE SACRED PALACE IN ROME, and in other cities and dioceses by the Inquisition, and the bishop or an expert appointed by him. FOR NEGLECT OF THIS THE PUNISHMENT WAS EXCOMMUNICATION, THE LOSS OF THE EDITION, WHICH WAS TO BE BURNED, a fine of 100 ducats to the fabric of St. Peters, and suspension from business for a year” (Henry Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages).

(7) These restrictions were repeated by the Council of Trent in 1546, which placed translations of the Bible, such as the German, Spanish, and English, on its list of prohibited books and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Catholic bishop or inquisitor.

Following is a quote from Trent: “…IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR ANYONE TO PRINT OR TO HAVE PRINTED ANY BOOKS WHATSOEVER DEALING WITH SACRED DOCTRINAL MATTERS WITHOUT THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR, OR IN THE FUTURE TO SELL THEM, OR EVEN TO HAVE THEM IN POSSESSION, UNLESS THEY HAVE FIRST BEEN EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE ORDINARY, UNDER PENALTY OF ANATHEMA AND FINE prescribed by the last Council of the Lateran” (Fourth session, April 8, 1546, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Translated by H.J. Schroeder, pp. 17-19).

These rules were affixed to the Index of Prohibited Books and were constantly reaffirmed by popes in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. These prohibitions, in fact, have never been rescinded. It is true that the Council of Trent did not absolutely forbid the reading of the Scriptures under all circumstances. It allowed a few exceptions. The priests were allowed to read the Latin Bible. Bishops and inquisitors were allowed to grant license for certain faithful Catholics to read the Scriptures in Latin as long as these Scriptures were accompanied by Catholic notes and if it was believed that these would not be “harmed” by such reading. In practice, though, the proclamations of Trent forbade the reading of the Holy Scriptures to at least nine-tenths of the people. Rome’s claim to possess authority to determine who can and cannot translate, publish, and read the Bible is one of the most blasphemous claims ever made under this sun.

The attitude of 16th century Catholic authorities toward the Bible was evident from a speech Richard Du Mans delivered at Trent, in which he said “that the Scriptures had become useless, since the schoolmen had established the truth of all doctrines; and though they were formerly read in the church, for the instruction of the people, and still read in the service, yet they ought not to be made a study, because the Lutherans only gained those who read them” (William M’Gavin, The Protestant, 1846, p. 144). It is true that the Bible leads men away from Roman Catholicism, but this is only because Roman Catholicism is not founded upon the Word of God!

Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and went even further by forbidding licenses to be granted for the reading of the Bible under any conditions (Richard Littledale, Plain Reasons Against Joining the Church of Rome, 1924, p. 91).

(8) The restrictions against ownership of the vernacular Scriptures were repeated by the popes until the end of the 19th century:

Benedict XIV (1740-1758) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and issued an injunction “that no versions whatever should be suffered to be read but those which should be approved of by the Holy See, accompanied by notes derived from the writings of the Holy Fathers, or other learned and Catholic authors” (D.B. Ray,The Papal Controversy, p. 479).

 

[bbyrd009]

It was during the reign of Pope Pius VII (1800-1823) that the modern Bible society movement began. The British and Foreign Bible Society was formed in March 1804, the purpose being “to encourage a wider circulation of the Holy Scriptures without note or comment.” Other societies were soon created for the same exalted purpose. Germany (1804); Ireland (1806); Canada (1807); Edinburgh (1809); Hungary (1811); Finland, Glasgow, Zurich, Prussia (1812); Russia (1813); Denmark and Sweden (1814); Netherlands, Iceland (1815); America, Norway, and Waldensian (1816); Australia, Malta, Paris (1817); etc. One of the societies began distributing a Polish Bible in Poland. The Pope, instead of praising the Lord that the eternal Word of God was being placed into the hands of the multitudes of spiritually needy people, showed his displeasure by issuing a bull against Bible Societies on June 29, 1816. The Pope expressed himself as “shocked” by the circulation of the Scriptures in the Polish tongue. He characterized this practice as a “most crafty device, by which the very foundations of religion are undermined,” “a pestilence,” which he must “remedy and abolish,” “a defilement of the faith, eminently dangerous to souls.” Pope Pius VII also rebuked Archbishop Buhusz of Mohiley in Russia because of his endorsement of a newly formed Bible society (Kenneth Latourette, The Nineteenth Century in Europe, p. 448). The papal brief, dated September 3, 1816, declared that “if the Sacred Scriptures were allowed in the vulgar tongue everywhere without discrimination, more detriment than benefit would arise” (Jacobus, Roman Catholic and Protestant Versions Compared, p. 236).

Pope Leo XII (1823-29) issued a bull to the Bishops in Ireland, May 3, 1824, in which he affirmed the Council of Trent and condemned Bible distribution. “It is no secret to you, venerable brethren, that a certain Society, vulgarly called The Bible Society, is audaciously spreading itself through the whole world. After despising the traditions of the holy Fathers, and in opposition to the well-known Decree of the Council of Trent, this Society has collected all its forces, and directs every means to one object,--the translation, or rather the perversion, of the Bible into the vernacular languages of all nations. ... IF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES BE EVERYWHERE INDISCRIMINATELY PUBLISHED, MORE EVIL THAN ADVANTAGE WILL ARISE THENCE, on account of the rashness of men” (Bull of Leo XII, May 3, 1824; cited from Charles Elliott, Delineation of Roman Catholicism, 1851, p. 21). This Pope re-published the Index of Prohibited Books on March 26, 1825, and mandated that the decrees of the Council of Trent be enforced against distribution of Scriptures (R.P. Blakeney, Popery in Its Social Aspect, p. 137).

Pope Gregory XVI (1831-46) ratified the decrees of his predecessors, forbidding the free distribution of Scripture. In his encyclical of May 8, 1844, this Pope stated: “Moreover, we confirm and renew the decrees recited above, DELIVERED IN FORMER TIMES BY APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, AGAINST THE PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, READING, AND POSSESSION OF BOOKS OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES TRANSLATED INTO THE VULGAR TONGUE” (James Wylie, The Papacy, 1867, p. 182). This encyclical was delivered against Bible societies in general, and mentioned in particular the Christian Alliance, which was formed in 1843 in New York for the purpose of distributing Scriptures.

Pope Pius IX (1846-78) in November 1846 issued an encyclical letter in which he denounced all opponents of Roman Catholicism, among which he included “those insidious Bible Societies.” He said the Bible societies were “renewing the crafts of the ancient heretics” by distributing to “all kinds of men, even the least instructed, gratuitously and at immense expense, copies in vast numbers of the books of the Sacred Scriptures translated against the holiest rules of the Church into various vulgar tongues...” What a horrible crime! Distributing the Scriptures freely to all people! It was Pius IX who had himself and his fellow popes declared “infallible” at the Vatican I Council in 1870.

Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903) published an “Apostolic Constitution” in 1897 which stated: “All versions of the vernacular, even by Catholics, are altogether prohibited, unless approved by the Holy See, or published under the vigilant care of the Bishops, with annotations taken from the Fathers of the Church and learned Catholic writers” (Melancthon Jacobus, Roman Catholic and Protestant Bibles, p. 237).

Where the Roman Catholic Church held power the Bible was always scarce. Consider a few examples: When the government of New Orleans was taken over in 1803, “it was not till after a long search for a Bible to administer the oath of office that a Latin Vulgate was at last procured from a priest” (William Canton, The Bible and the Anglo-Saxon People, I, p. 245). In Quebec, as late as 1826, MANY PEOPLE HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE NEW TESTAMENT (Canton, II, 61). The situation was the same in South America, where “for about three centuries, were almost entirely without the Bible.” It was 1831 before the first Bible was printed in Spanish America, and even then the copies were exorbitantly expensive (Canton, II, 347). Thus, even when Catholic authorities finally printed some Bibles, they were priced far beyond the reach of most people. Between December 1907 and February 1908 a diligent search was made to determine how many Bibles were available in Catholic Ireland. Not a portion of the Bible was available in bookshops in Athlone, Balbriggan, Drogheda, Mullingar, Wexford, and Clonmel. A shop assistant at Mullingar said, “I never saw a Catholic Bible.” When asked about the New Testament, a sales person at the The Catholic Truth Society replied, “We don’t keep it.” Those who did the extensive survey concluded “that IN NINE TENTHS OF THE CITIES, TOWNS, AND VILLAGES OR IRELAND A ROMAN CATHOLIC COULD NOT PROCURE A COPY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE OR NEW TESTAMENT” (Alexander Robertson, The Papal Conquest, 1909, pp. 166-167).

These facts uncover only the tip of iceberg in regard to Rome’s attitude toward the Bible in former times...

 

[KBCid]

Is the Church Spirit or physical?
Matthew 16:16-19 KJV
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. [17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
If Spirit, then what of Matthew 16: 16-19 is the church built on?
Which Church did Saul persecute?

Church is a translational word that comes from the Greek ekklesia also known as the assembly or those who have been called.

There are as many "churches" as there are groups who assemble as the body of Christ;
Romans 16:1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church (assembly) which is at Cenchrea: 2 That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also. 3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: 4 Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches (assemblies) of the Gentiles. 5 Likewise greet the church (assembly) that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.

Ephesians 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

When Christ is addressing Peter it is as a type of believer just as Peter defines it;

1 Peter 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, 5Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

 

[BreadOfLife]

(6) Pope Leo X (1513-1521), who railed against Luther’s efforts to follow the biblical precept of faith alone and Scripture alone, called the fifth Lateran Council (1513-1517), which charged that no books should be printed except those approved by the Roman Catholic Church. “THEREFORE FOREVER THEREAFTER NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PRINT ANY BOOK OR WRITING WITHOUT A PREVIOUS EXAMINATION, TO BE TESTIFIED BY MANUAL SUBSCRIPTION, BY THE PAPAL VICAR AND MASTER OF THE SACRED PALACE IN ROME, and in other cities and dioceses by the Inquisition, and the bishop or an expert appointed by him. FOR NEGLECT OF THIS THE PUNISHMENT WAS EXCOMMUNICATION, THE LOSS OF THE EDITION, WHICH WAS TO BE BURNED, a fine of 100 ducats to the fabric of St. Peters, and suspension from business for a year” (Henry Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages).

(7) These restrictions were repeated by the Council of Trent in 1546, which placed translations of the Bible, such as the German, Spanish, and English, on its list of prohibited books and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Catholic bishop or inquisitor.

Following is a quote from Trent: “…IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR ANYONE TO PRINT OR TO HAVE PRINTED ANY BOOKS WHATSOEVER DEALING WITH SACRED DOCTRINAL MATTERS WITHOUT THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR, OR IN THE FUTURE TO SELL THEM, OR EVEN TO HAVE THEM IN POSSESSION, UNLESS THEY HAVE FIRST BEEN EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE ORDINARY, UNDER PENALTY OF ANATHEMA AND FINE prescribed by the last Council of the Lateran” (Fourth session, April 8, 1546, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Translated by H.J. Schroeder, pp. 17-19).

These rules were affixed to the Index of Prohibited Books and were constantly reaffirmed by popes in the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. These prohibitions, in fact, have never been rescinded. It is true that the Council of Trent did not absolutely forbid the reading of the Scriptures under all circumstances. It allowed a few exceptions. The priests were allowed to read the Latin Bible. Bishops and inquisitors were allowed to grant license for certain faithful Catholics to read the Scriptures in Latin as long as these Scriptures were accompanied by Catholic notes and if it was believed that these would not be “harmed” by such reading. In practice, though, the proclamations of Trent forbade the reading of the Holy Scriptures to at least nine-tenths of the people. Rome’s claim to possess authority to determine who can and cannot translate, publish, and read the Bible is one of the most blasphemous claims ever made under this sun.

The attitude of 16th century Catholic authorities toward the Bible was evident from a speech Richard Du Mans delivered at Trent, in which he said “that the Scriptures had become useless, since the schoolmen had established the truth of all doctrines; and though they were formerly read in the church, for the instruction of the people, and still read in the service, yet they ought not to be made a study, because the Lutherans only gained those who read them” (William M’Gavin, The Protestant, 1846, p. 144). It is true that the Bible leads men away from Roman Catholicism, but this is only because Roman Catholicism is not founded upon the Word of God!

Pope Clement VIII (1592-1605) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and went even further by forbidding licenses to be granted for the reading of the Bible under any conditions (Richard Littledale, Plain Reasons Against Joining the Church of Rome, 1924, p. 91).

(8) The restrictions against ownership of the vernacular Scriptures were repeated by the popes until the end of the 19th century:

Benedict XIV (1740-1758) confirmed the Council of Trent’s proclamations against Bible translations (Eadie, History of the English Bible, II, p. 112) and issued an injunction “that no versions whatever should be suffered to be read but those which should be approved of by the Holy See, accompanied by notes derived from the writings of the Holy Fathers, or other learned and Catholic authors” (D.B. Ray,The Papal Controversy, p. 479).

And you can sit there and pretend that you don't see the words "VERNACULAR" and "ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF" and imagine that you have a case.

There were many spurious and heavily-flawed translations going on during this time. These were not being translated from the "masses" - but from educated and/or rich people.

NOBODY was being punished for "looking" at the Bible.
Is was for perverting the Bible.

 

[KBCid]

These facts uncover only the tip of iceberg in regard to Rome’s attitude toward the Bible in former times...

ummm... Do you have an indulgence to talk about the Bible or the Popes? "How about a little fire scarecrow?"

It is nice to see that you have looked into history. I commend your seeking of truth.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Church is a translational word that comes from the Greek ekklesia also known as the assembly or those who have been called.

There are as many "churches" as there are groups who assemble as the body of Christ;
Romans 16:1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church (assembly) which is at Cenchrea: 2 That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also. 3 Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: 4 Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches (assemblies) of the Gentiles. 5 Likewise greet the church (assembly) that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.

Ephesians 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

When Christ is addressing Peter it is as a type of believer just as Peter defines it;

1 Peter 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, 5Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

The question is: if Christ is the head and Christ is Spirit. Then wouldn't that mean the body of Christ is also Spirit?


Romans 8:10 KJV
[10] And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

If the body is dead, then what body is the church? One spirit; one body.

Matthew 16:18 KJV
[18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The gates of hell shall not prevail against what church, what body? We think body as the one we are walking around in, but this body can be killed. Is this body that can be killed, the temple of God?

The body is dead if you are in Christ.
Of One mind. Spirit.

 

[GodsGrace]

This makes me chuckle...I can't say that I did not expect you to respond as soon as I wrote my post. lol
I only argue with @[B][COLOR=#b30000]GodsGrace[/COLOR][/B] I honestly am not into the long on-going discussions which you enjoy .
I will continue to believe that the Church is built firmly upon the foundational revelation that Jesus Christ is the Son of God...I cannot move from that.
If you read much or anything that I post you will know that I do NOT follow the 'traditional teachings' on this subject or on many other subjects...

I am sure you will die believing that Peter is your rock. That is your right.
Take care...
Every blessing....Helen.

LOL
I'm soooooo honored !!

 

[bbyrd009]

NOBODY was being punished for "looking" at the Bible.

so you say, but i have learned to not use words like "nobody, everybody, always, never" etc.
i mean, wadr, i'm sure the Inquisition was all a big misunderstanding too, right; and indulgences are prolly a good thing lol

Is was for perverting the Bible.

hopefully you see how ridiculous this reads, coming from a guy who reads a Bible with altered Commandments, who cannot justify many of his beliefs with Scripture any kind of way, at least not to the rest of Christendom.

"Vulgar" is strictly judgement, and a "vulgar" Bible would have to stand up to the Lex--not to mention God's judgement--on it's own, anyway; as if the Latin Vulgate could even stand up to that, i mean please. The later Vulgates--under the direction of the RCC--are complete garbage, not even considered in the chain anymore. So now the judges are judged. Btw i have read a Vulgar Bible, at least sort of, and i'll take it over a DRB any time, ty, forsooths and all.

 

[BreadOfLife]

so you say, but i have learned to not use words like "nobody, everybody, always, never" etc.
i mean, wadr, i'm sure the Inquisition was all a big misunderstanding too, right; and indulgences are prolly a good thing lol

Careful - your ignorance is showing again.
First of all - until you can prove that people were executed for simply "looking" at Bibles - then you need to keep quiet.

Secondly - it's glaringly apparent that you have NO idea what the Inquisitions were about and don't really have a grasp on the subject of indulgences.

hopefully you see how ridiculous this reads, coming from a guy who reads a Bible with altered Commandments, who cannot justify many of his beliefs with Scripture any kind of way, at least not to the rest of Christendom.

"Vulgar" is strictly judgement, and a "vulgar" Bible would have to stand up to the Lex--not to mention God's judgement--on it's own, anyway; as if the Latin Vulgate could even stand up to that, i mean please. The later Vulgates--under the direction of the RCC--are complete garbage, not even considered in the chain anymore. So now the judges are judged. Btw i have read a Vulgar Bible, at least sort of, and i'll take it over a DRB any time, ty, forsooths and all.

WRONG.

There were MANY bad translations of the Bible being written which caused the Church to ban them
In one vernacular translation, the word "not" is left out of the 2nd Commandment, so it says "Thou shalt take the Lord’s name in vain."

Another translation claimed that Adam and Eve wore breeches (pants) made of fig leaves.
The problem was that amateur linguists were messing with the inerrant Word of God and perverting it.

As to your extremely ignorant comment on so-called "Altered Commandments" - you have MUCH to learn . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

ummm... Do you have an indulgence to talk about the Bible or the Popes? "How about a little fire scarecrow?"
It is nice to see that you have looked into history. I commend your seeking of truth.

It's glaringly apparent that neither of you have . . .

 

[KBCid]

It's glaringly apparent that neither of you have . . .

One does not even have to go to history to learn about your cult..... it's in the headlines quite a bit;

How Rich Is the Catholic Church? It's Impossible to Tell
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- Feeling guilty about investing in "sin" stocks, like makers of guns, cigarettes and alcohol products? Don't. Over the course of its history of investing, the Catholic Church has done much worse.
In the 1960s, Italian media uncovered evidence that the Vatican had invested in entities that conflict directly with the church's holy mission, including Istituto Farmacologico Serono, a pharmaceutical company that made birth control pills, and Udine, a military weapons manufacturer. There have also been unconfirmed rumor of church money in firearms manufacturer Beretta and companies with activities in gambling and pornography. It has been linked to dealings with Nazi gold during World War II as well.

The Catholic Church has a history of corruption, and it is a notoriously opaque institution. Sexual abuse accusations (and the consequent cover-ups) have put it in the headlines most recently, but it has been at the center of numerous scandals over the years, ranging from accusations of ties to the mafia in Rome to allegations of stealing babies in Chile and Spain.

Just recently, the Vatican was caught up in yet another financial scandal, when Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, who was an accountant at the bank that managed the Church's real estate investments, was arrested when he tried to smuggle €20 million ($26 million in 2013, when the plot was uncovered) into Italy, allegedly on behalf of the d'Amico shipping family. He told the authorities that he stood to gain €2.5 million on the deal. Investigators were first alerted to him when he reported paintings stolen from his apartment and police discovered a luxurious pad packed to the ceiling with expensive art and furnishings, which the Monsignor, who draws a small salary as a member of the clergy, claimed were gifts.
https://www.thestreet.com/story/132...-catholic-church-it-s-impossible-to-tell.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15 World Hunger Statistics

1) Approximately 842 million people suffer from hunger worldwide. That’s almost 12 percent of the world’s population of 7.1 billion people.

4) Approximately 9 million people die of world hunger each year according to world hunger statistics; more than the death toll for malaria, AIDs and tuberculosis combined in 2012.


What would Christ think and do?

 

[BreadOfLife]

One does not even have to go to history to learn about your cult..... it's in the headlines quite a bit;

How Rich Is the Catholic Church? It's Impossible to Tell
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- Feeling guilty about investing in "sin" stocks, like makers of guns, cigarettes and alcohol products? Don't. Over the course of its history of investing, the Catholic Church has done much worse.
In the 1960s, Italian media uncovered evidence that the Vatican had invested in entities that conflict directly with the church's holy mission, including Istituto Farmacologico Serono, a pharmaceutical company that made birth control pills, and Udine, a military weapons manufacturer. There have also been unconfirmed rumor of church money in firearms manufacturer Beretta and companies with activities in gambling and pornography. It has been linked to dealings with Nazi gold during World War II as well.

The Catholic Church has a history of corruption, and it is a notoriously opaque institution. Sexual abuse accusations (and the consequent cover-ups) have put it in the headlines most recently, but it has been at the center of numerous scandals over the years, ranging from accusations of ties to the mafia in Rome to allegations of stealing babies in Chile and Spain.

Just recently, the Vatican was caught up in yet another financial scandal, when Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, who was an accountant at the bank that managed the Church's real estate investments, was arrested when he tried to smuggle €20 million ($26 million in 2013, when the plot was uncovered) into Italy, allegedly on behalf of the d'Amico shipping family. He told the authorities that he stood to gain €2.5 million on the deal. Investigators were first alerted to him when he reported paintings stolen from his apartment and police discovered a luxurious pad packed to the ceiling with expensive art and furnishings, which the Monsignor, who draws a small salary as a member of the clergy, claimed were gifts.
https://www.thestreet.com/story/132...-catholic-church-it-s-impossible-to-tell.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 World Hunger Statistics

1) Approximately 842 million people suffer from hunger worldwide. That’s almost 12 percent of the world’s population of 7.1 billion people.

4) Approximately 9 million people die of world hunger each year according to world hunger statistics; more than the death toll for malaria, AIDs and tuberculosis combined in 2012.

What would Christ think and do?

And here are some statistics for you, my ignorant anti-Catholic friend:

FIRST of all -
- The Catholic Church is the LARGEST charitable organization in the WORLD.
- Every day, the Catholic Church feeds, clothes, shelters and educates more people than ANY organization in the world.
- Charities run by the Church include 5,305 hospitals including 1694 in the Americas and 1,150 in Africa.
- The Church also has 18,179 clinics including 5,762 in the Americas and 5,312 in Africa 3,884 in Asia.
- It also manages 17,223 homes for old people, the terminally ill and the handicapped – most of them (8,021) in Europe and the Americas (5,650).
- It also runs 9,882 orphanages – a third of them in Asia.

Most countries don't even come close to the to the dollars spent on charity that the Church does.

As to the sex scandal - clean up your OWN back yard before you go pointing fingers at the Catholic Church.
In his book, Pedophiles and Priests - PROTESTANT author Philip Jenkins shows tha real statistics of what is going on in Catholic and Protestant Churches. The abuse cases in Protestant churches DWARFS what happened in the Catholic Church.

The reasons that the Catholic Church was a target for lawyers:
- The Church's perceived wealth
- The fact that many Protestant sects aren't insured
- The fact that many Protestant churches are small and there's no money in it.

The bottom line: MONEY
The truth has been swept under the table and anti-Catholics like YOU remain in denial . . .

 

[KBCid]

And here are some statistics for you, my ignorant anti-Catholic friend:
The bottom line: MONEY
The truth has been swept under the table and anti-Catholics like YOU remain in denial . . .

Very funny. I am actually an anti-evil person and not a friend to any that follow evil.
So you think that because your cult gives A "PART" of the money that they take in to charity that it makes them a true reflection of Christ? Let me let you in on a little secret here....
ALL the money that the faithful give should rightly be given to the poor and the widows and any that are in need.
IF your cult withholds any of it in order to increase their own savings or power base then it is EVIL. People are starving right now and your cult has billions sitting on the sidelines which is used to make more money for themselves. asserting that they spend more than anyone else holds no meaning in reality since they are in fact not using all of what is given for the purpose that God wants done with it.

Luke 18:18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God. 20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother. 21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up. 22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. 23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.

Your cult is very rich and has no quandary about holding back what it desires to keep from those in need.

The Catholic Church is the Biggest Financial Power on Earth
Have you ever wondered how wealthy the church really is? In his book, ‘The Vatican Billions’, writer and philosopher Avro Manhattan gives us a glimpse of the true financial worth of the catholic church:

“The Vatican has large investments with the Rothschilds of Britain, France and America, with the Hambros Bank, with the Credit Suisse in London and Zurich. In the United States it has large investments with the Morgan Bank, the Chase-Manhattan Bank, the First National Bank of New York, the Bankers Trust Company, and others.

“The Vatican has billions of shares in the most powerful international corporations such as Gulf Oil, Shell, General Motors, Bethlehem Steel, General Electric, International Business Machines, T.W.A., etc.” (...)

The Vatican, independently of each successive pope, has been increasingly orientated towards the U.S. The Wall Street Journal said that the Vatican’s financial deals in the U.S. alone were so big that very often it sold or bought gold in lots of a million or more dollars at one time.” (...)

“The Vatican’s treasure of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. A large bulk of this is stored in gold ingots with the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, while banks in England and Switzerland hold the rest.

“But this is just a small portion of the wealth of the Vatican, which in the U.S. alone, is greater than that of the five wealthiest giant corporations of the country. When to that is added all the real estate, property, stocks and shares abroad, then the staggering accumulation of the wealth of the Catholic church becomes so formidable as to defy any rational assessment.” (...)

“The Catholic church is the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator and property owner in existence. She is a greater possessor of material riches than any other single institution, corporation, bank, giant trust, government or state of the whole globe.

“The pope, as the visible ruler of this immense amassment of wealth, is consequently the richest individual of the twentieth century. No one can realistically assess how much he is worth in terms of billions of dollars.” (...)

Mr. Manhattan asks one of the most challenging questions regarding the moral conduit of the catholic church:

“Jesus was the poorest of the poor. Roman Catholicism, which claims to be His church, is the richest of the rich, the wealthiest institution on earth. (…) How come, that such an institution, ruling in the name of this same itinerant preacher, whose want was such that he had not even a pillow upon which to rest his head, is now so top-heavy with riches that she can rival - indeed, that she can put to shame - the combined might of the most redoubtable financial trusts, of the most potent industrial super-giants, and of the most prosperous global corporation of the world?”

I would love to hear the pope answering this question.

I have no interest in their wealth from a personal perspective, but I am outraged of their corruption as a member of the human species. Their wealth is so big that they could create sustainable social programs to end famine on Earth; they have the power and the means to oppose wars; they have the financial resources to create an Eco-friendly planet -- the biblical heaven on Earth.

But how could they be willing to invest in “green technology” when they have huge investments in oil and gas cars manufacturers? In fact, the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars perfectly suit their financial investments.

In conclusion, religion is financially and morally corrupt.
The Catholic Church is the Biggest Financial Power on Earth | Humans Are Free

Understanding comes from the word of God;
Ezekiel 18:5 But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right, 6 And hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, neither hath defiled his neighbour's wife, neither hath come near to a menstruous woman, 7 And hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment; 8 He that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any increase, that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity, hath executed true judgment between man and man, 9 Hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord God.

Your cult shows little if any of the things God desires from his people.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Very funny. I am actually an anti-evil person and not a friend to any that follow evil.
So you think that because your cult gives A "PART" of the money that they take in to charity that it makes them a true reflection of Christ? Let me let you in on a little secret here....
ALL the money that the faithful give should rightly be given to the poor and the widows and any that are in need.
IF your cult withholds any of it in order to increase their own savings or power base then it is EVIL. People are starving right now and your cult has billions sitting on the sidelines which is used to make more money for themselves. asserting that they spend more than anyone else holds no meaning in reality since they are in fact not using all of what is given for the purpose that God wants done with it.

Luke 18:18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God. 20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother. 21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up. 22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. 23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.

Your cult is very rich and has no quandary about holding back what it desires to keep from those in need.

The Catholic Church is the Biggest Financial Power on Earth
Have you ever wondered how wealthy the church really is? In his book, ‘The Vatican Billions’, writer and philosopher Avro Manhattan gives us a glimpse of the true financial worth of the catholic church:

“The Vatican has large investments with the Rothschilds of Britain, France and America, with the Hambros Bank, with the Credit Suisse in London and Zurich. In the United States it has large investments with the Morgan Bank, the Chase-Manhattan Bank, the First National Bank of New York, the Bankers Trust Company, and others.

“The Vatican has billions of shares in the most powerful international corporations such as Gulf Oil, Shell, General Motors, Bethlehem Steel, General Electric, International Business Machines, T.W.A., etc.” (...)

The Vatican, independently of each successive pope, has been increasingly orientated towards the U.S. The Wall Street Journal said that the Vatican’s financial deals in the U.S. alone were so big that very often it sold or bought gold in lots of a million or more dollars at one time.” (...)

“The Vatican’s treasure of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. A large bulk of this is stored in gold ingots with the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, while banks in England and Switzerland hold the rest.

“But this is just a small portion of the wealth of the Vatican, which in the U.S. alone, is greater than that of the five wealthiest giant corporations of the country. When to that is added all the real estate, property, stocks and shares abroad, then the staggering accumulation of the wealth of the Catholic church becomes so formidable as to defy any rational assessment.” (...)

“The Catholic church is the biggest financial power, wealth accumulator and property owner in existence. She is a greater possessor of material riches than any other single institution, corporation, bank, giant trust, government or state of the whole globe.

“The pope, as the visible ruler of this immense amassment of wealth, is consequently the richest individual of the twentieth century. No one can realistically assess how much he is worth in terms of billions of dollars.” (...)

Mr. Manhattan asks one of the most challenging questions regarding the moral conduit of the catholic church:

“Jesus was the poorest of the poor. Roman Catholicism, which claims to be His church, is the richest of the rich, the wealthiest institution on earth. (…) How come, that such an institution, ruling in the name of this same itinerant preacher, whose want was such that he had not even a pillow upon which to rest his head, is now so top-heavy with riches that she can rival - indeed, that she can put to shame - the combined might of the most redoubtable financial trusts, of the most potent industrial super-giants, and of the most prosperous global corporation of the world?”

I would love to hear the pope answering this question.

I have no interest in their wealth from a personal perspective, but I am outraged of their corruption as a member of the human species. Their wealth is so big that they could create sustainable social programs to end famine on Earth; they have the power and the means to oppose wars; they have the financial resources to create an Eco-friendly planet -- the biblical heaven on Earth.

But how could they be willing to invest in “green technology” when they have huge investments in oil and gas cars manufacturers? In fact, the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars perfectly suit their financial investments.

In conclusion, religion is financially and morally corrupt.
The Catholic Church is the Biggest Financial Power on Earth | Humans Are Free

Sooooo, are you going to report me again when I set you straight like you did the last time - or =are you going to fight your own battles?

Contrary to your preposterous drivel about wealth - the Vatican operates on an annual budget the size of the Archdiocese of Chicago.
The "billions" you spoke of go to the approximately 5,305 hospitals, 18,179 clinics, 17,223 homes, 9,882 orphanages, millions of grocery cards for the homeless and thousands of food and clothing banks around the world. Some of the money is allocated to local archdioceses for the upkeep and continuation of parishes and yes, some of it is invested for more charitable works.

Your charge that the Catholic Church is the "Biggest Financial Power on Earth" is ludicrous and without merit.
It doesn't even make sense, given the number of practicing, financially-contributing Catholics around the world.

Here's a little advice: Just because you read something on the internet from a moronic site like "humansarefree.com" doesn't make it true . . .

Finally - as to your immature insistence that the Catholic Church s a "cult" - you apparently have NO clue as to what a "cult" actually is.

 

[KBCid]

Sooooo, are you going to report me again when I set you straight like you did the last time - or =are you going to fight your own battles?
Contrary to your preposterous drivel about wealth - the Vatican operates on an annual budget the size of the Archdiocese of Chicago.
The "billions" you spoke of go to the approximately 5,305 hospitals, 18,179 clinics, 17,223 homes, 9,882 orphanages, millions of grocery cards for the homeless and thousands of food and clothing banks around the world. Some of the money is allocated to local archdioceses for the upkeep and continuation of parishes and yes, some of it is invested for more charitable works.

Acts 4:32-5:11
32Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. 33With great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. 34There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. 35They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

I don't see the original church holding anything back from people in need

 

[BreadOfLife]

Acts 4:32-5:11
32Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. 33With great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. 34There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. 35They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

I don't see the original church holding anything back from people in need

Does YOUR church feed and clothe the entire world?
Does it feed and clothe as many as the Catholic Church??

Did the original Church in Acts feed the entire world?
Your example is impotent unless the answer to all 3 questions is "Yes."