The Catholic Church gets put down a lot, but it was all that could help

[TopherNelson]

read this far..

I just KNEW u would give THAT example... See, i have been dealing w/ these kinds of things... apologetics.. obstinate protestants for a long time

so anyhow, yeh, i guess u had better stop calling your biological father Father then

see what happens when u go by Bible alone?

u begin to sound follish

Nope. You sound foolish. The Father being referred to is God. Coincidentally, we have catholic father and pope. Who rule "in-the-place" of God. You need a reality check, if the catholic church interpreted the bible correctly, you need to renounce the christian faith.

 

[michaelvpardo]

u begin to sound follish

I'd rather be foolish for Christ than stand with the world . I hate to be the one who breaks it to you, but the RCC will suffer horribly for its rebellion (consider what happened to the 10 tribes of Israel that followed Jeroboam.) However, the Lord knows His own, is completely able to keep them, and will keep His word. In the end the RCC will be purified, though you fellows will need to replace most of your leadership. Don't worry, wisdom grows under persecution and holiness is the result of the presence of God.

 

[ScaliaFan]

Yes, RC pray to statues of all kinds, especially Mary...have seen it first hand, as a RC churchgoer to the age of 9 or so, when I learned the truth, and ran away from that pagan based religion....they have not changed...still pray to these same statues even today, and kiss their feet etc...does that sound "christian"?

that is laughable and ridiculous.. you just believe what some protestant pastor tells us.. Protestants have their popes as well... anyone w/ a minister's license.

too bad all your popes do not agree w/ one another. I would imagine that can be quite confusing and troubling, esp when ea member of the congregation also considers him/herself "pope"... master interpreter of the Bible... etc

 

[ScaliaFan]

I'd rather be foolish for Christ than stand with the world . I hate to be the one who breaks it to you, but the RCC will suffer horribly for its rebellion (consider what happened to the 10 tribes of Israel that followed Jeroboam.) However, the Lord knows His own, is completely able to keep them, and will keep His word. In the end the RCC will be purified, though you fellows will need to replace most of your leadership. Don't worry, wisdom grows under persecution and holiness is the result of the presence of God.

i hate to tell u but nonCatholics also will suffer horribly for their rebellion... etc... priests killed just 4 being Catholic and etc... (read history of the Church some time... fascinating)

 

[epostle1]

Nope. You sound foolish. The Father being referred to is God. Coincidentally, we have catholic father and pope. Who rule "in-the-place" of God. You need a reality check, if the catholic church interpreted the bible correctly, you need to renounce the christian faith.

The Pope is the Vicar of Christ. Vicar means ambassador or servant. "Taking the place of God" is anti-Catholic hate speech, and unbecoming of anyone claiming to be a Christian. I am aware of how bible cults change the wording of old encyclicals to make it look like the Pope declares to be God, don't embarrass yourself.

There are no graven images in any Catholic Church. If you really went by the Bible you would know the biblical definition of a graven image. And you forget where God commands the (proper) use of religious images in the Temple. Are you anti-Jewish as well???

Your bible cult really has a grip on you, don't they.

 

[epostle1]

I'd rather be foolish for Christ than stand with the world . I hate to be the one who breaks it to you, but the RCC will suffer horribly for its rebellion (consider what happened to the 10 tribes of Israel that followed Jeroboam.) However, the Lord knows His own, is completely able to keep them, and will keep His word. In the end the RCC will be purified, though you fellows will need to replace most of your leadership. Don't worry, wisdom grows under persecution and holiness is the result of the presence of God.

If the CC rebelled, it would have been a monumentous event, and would be recorded in history. What was the date and/or teaching when this alleged major historical event took place? Why did it take up to the 15th century for anyone to notice, conveniently in the middle of a Protestant revolt?

Replace leadership? You're kidding, right? Pope Francis is a humble and holy man, he is there because the Holy Spirit wants him there. Reading media headlines does not make you an expert on Catholic leadership. Try reading what he actuality says.

You’re trying to set the Bible against the Church, which is typical Protestant methodology, and ultra-unbiblical. The Bible never does that.

The Bible repeatedly teaches that the Church is indefectible; therefore, the hypothetical of rejecting the (one true, historic) Church, as supposedly going against the Bible, is impossible according to the Bible. It is not a situation that would ever come up, because of God’s promised protection.

What the Bible says is to reject those who cause divisions, which is the very essence of the onset of Protestantism: schism, sectarianism, and division. It is Protestantism that departed from the historic Church, which is indefectible and infallible (see also 1 Tim 3:15).
Protestants don’t have enough faith to believe that God could preserve an infallible Church, even though they can muster up even more faith than that, which is required to believe in an infallible Bible written by a bunch of sinners and hypocrites.
We simply have more faith than you guys do. It’s a supernatural gift. We believe that the authoritative Church is also a key part of God’s plan to save the souls of men. We follow the model of the Jerusalem Council, whereas you guys reject that or ignore it, because it doesn’t fit in with the man-made tradition of Protestantism and a supposedly non-infallible Church.

 

[heretoeternity]

If the Roman church is infallible like you say it is, why are you ashamed still to call it by it's real name? Why has this organization been involved in so many crimes against humanity over the centuries? Why does it NOT follow the Bible? Just a few questions for you to chew on!

 

[epostle1]

If the Roman church is infallible like you say it is, why are you ashamed still to call it by it's real name? Why has this organization been involved in so many crimes against humanity over the centuries? Why does it NOT follow the Bible? Just a few questions for you to chew on!

Her real name is Catholic Church, not "Roman" church. "Roman" is one of 23 other rites. They didn't disappear. "Catholic" is in the Bible, translated from the Greek "KATAHOLOS".
Catholic Rites and Churches

Infallibility means teaching without error, it has nothing to do with impeccability which means living without sinning. It doesn't come from popes, bishops or councils, it comes from God Himself. It's not me that says it.

Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 - Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. This requires that the Church teach infallibly. If the Church did not have the gift of infallibility, the gates of Hades and error would prevail. Also, since the Catholic Church was the only Church that existed up until the Reformation, those who follow the Protestant reformers call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.

Matt. 16:19 - for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift. (can heaven bind an error?)

Matt. 18:17-18 - the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith. This demands infallibility when teaching the faith. She must be prevented from teaching error in order to lead her members to the fullness of salvation.

Matt. 28:20 - Jesus promises that He will be with the Church always. Jesus' presence in the Church assures infallible teaching on faith and morals. With Jesus present, we can never be deceived.

Luke 10:16 - whoever hears you, hears me. Whoever rejects you, rejects me. Jesus is very clear that the bishops of the Church speak with Christ's infallible authority.

Luke 22:32 - Jesus prays for Peter, that his faith may not fail. Jesus' prayer for Peter's faith is perfectly efficacious, and this allows Peter to teach the faith without error (which means infallibly), unless you argue that the Father ignored Jesus' prayer.

John 11:51-52 - some non-Catholics argue that sinners cannot have the power to teach infallibly. But in this verse, God allows Caiaphas to prophesy infallibly, even though he was evil and plotted Jesus' death. God allows sinners to teach infallibly, just as He allows sinners to become saints. As a loving Father, He exalts His children, and is bound by His own justice to give His children a mechanism to know truth from error.

1 & 2 Peter - for example, Peter denied Christ, he was rebuked by his greatest bishop (Paul), and yet he wrote two infallible encyclicals. Further, if Peter could teach infallibly by writing, why could he not also teach infallibly by preaching? And why couldn't his successors so teach as well?

Eph. 5:32- Paul calls the Church a "mystery." This means that the significance of the Church as the kingdom of God in our midst cannot be understood by reason alone. Understanding the Church also requires faith. "Church" does not mean a building of believers. That is not a mystery. Non-Catholics often view church as mere community, but not the supernatural mystery of Christ physically present among us.
read more here

It is my experience over the years of being on forums that anti-Catholics cannot comprehend what the Bible says about infallibility, they stick to false definitions no matter how eloquently it is explained or how many times.
Why don't YOU follow the Bible???

Why has this organization been involved in so many crimes against humanity over the centuries?

This is a meaningless generalization and nothing more than Protestant propaganda. Be specific. Name the crimes, year, and place. Document your sources because there are a lot of false histories on the Internet. It would take 20 pages to sort out the facts from the numerous myths invented by Protestants so specify which alleged "crimes against humanity" you are talking about. We are not afraid of historical truth, but Protestantism in general is forced to re-write or ignore it.

What the Crusades Were Really Like (by a professor of medieval history)
Inquisition

If you wish to engage in a pointless rock throwing contest, chew on this:
THE PROTESTANT INQUISITION

 

[heretoeternity]

Her real name is Catholic Church, not "Roman" church. "Roman" is one of 23 other rites. They didn't disappear. "Catholic" is in the Bible, translated from the Greek "KATAHOLOS".
Catholic Rites and Churches

Infallibility means teaching without error, it has nothing to do with impeccability which means living without sinning. It doesn't come from popes, bishops or councils, it comes from God Himself. It's not me that says it.

Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 - Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. This requires that the Church teach infallibly. If the Church did not have the gift of infallibility, the gates of Hades and error would prevail. Also, since the Catholic Church was the only Church that existed up until the Reformation, those who follow the Protestant reformers call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.

Matt. 16:19 - for Jesus to give Peter and the apostles, mere human beings, the authority to bind in heaven what they bound on earth requires infallibility. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit and has nothing to do with the holiness of the person receiving the gift. (can heaven bind an error?)

Matt. 18:17-18 - the Church (not Scripture) is the final authority on questions of the faith. This demands infallibility when teaching the faith. She must be prevented from teaching error in order to lead her members to the fullness of salvation.

Matt. 28:20 - Jesus promises that He will be with the Church always. Jesus' presence in the Church assures infallible teaching on faith and morals. With Jesus present, we can never be deceived.

Luke 10:16 - whoever hears you, hears me. Whoever rejects you, rejects me. Jesus is very clear that the bishops of the Church speak with Christ's infallible authority.

Luke 22:32 - Jesus prays for Peter, that his faith may not fail. Jesus' prayer for Peter's faith is perfectly efficacious, and this allows Peter to teach the faith without error (which means infallibly), unless you argue that the Father ignored Jesus' prayer.

John 11:51-52 - some non-Catholics argue that sinners cannot have the power to teach infallibly. But in this verse, God allows Caiaphas to prophesy infallibly, even though he was evil and plotted Jesus' death. God allows sinners to teach infallibly, just as He allows sinners to become saints. As a loving Father, He exalts His children, and is bound by His own justice to give His children a mechanism to know truth from error.

1 & 2 Peter - for example, Peter denied Christ, he was rebuked by his greatest bishop (Paul), and yet he wrote two infallible encyclicals. Further, if Peter could teach infallibly by writing, why could he not also teach infallibly by preaching? And why couldn't his successors so teach as well?

Eph. 5:32- Paul calls the Church a "mystery." This means that the significance of the Church as the kingdom of God in our midst cannot be understood by reason alone. Understanding the Church also requires faith. "Church" does not mean a building of believers. That is not a mystery. Non-Catholics often view church as mere community, but not the supernatural mystery of Christ physically present among us.
read more here

It is my experience over the years of being on forums that anti-Catholics cannot comprehend what the Bible says about infallibility, they stick to false definitions no matter how eloquently it is explained or how many times.
Why don't YOU follow the Bible???
This is a meaningless generalization and nothing more than Protestant propaganda. Be specific. Name the crimes, year, and place. Document your sources because there are a lot of false histories on the Internet. It would take 20 pages to sort out the facts from the numerous myths invented by Protestants so specify which alleged "crimes against humanity" you are talking about. We are not afraid of historical truth, but Protestantism in general is forced to re-write or ignore it.

What the Crusades Were Really Like (by a professor of medieval history)
Inquisition

If you wish to engage in a pointless rock throwing contest, chew on this:
THE PROTESTANT INQUISITION





You keep mentioning "protestant" by passing the buck to others...you have to answer for the humanitarian crimes of the Roman Catholic religious organization..."protestants' will have to answer for theirs, if there are any....
You are trying to rewrite history, which shows how desperate you are to gloss over the Roman catholic organization and it's deviation from the Bible, and it's many atrocities committed over the centuries...you cannot rewrite history, so quit trying...and as you are ashamed of the name Roman Catholic why not admit it? That is the official name, so you have to live with it!

 

[michaelvpardo]

If the CC rebelled, it would have been a monumentous event, and would be recorded in history. What was the date and/or teaching when this alleged major historical event took place? Why did it take up to the 15th century for anyone to notice, conveniently in the middle of a Protestant revolt?

There's been numerous rebellions in the RCC. At one time there were even two popes, one in France and one in Rome. Some of the rebellions were just political assassinations. The story of Pope Fortunatis' murder and trial (after his murder) is one of the more infamous stories of Papal succession. After being murdered, his successor held a trial for his body, found him guilty, cut off his fingers of blessing and had his body tossed in the river. That information comes form Roman Catholic historical documents, and a rather boring book called "The bad Popes."

Good luck with rewriting history, but you have a bit more to do. BTW, I think that it was Roman Catholics that came up with the name "protestant" as we just call ourselves saints (as the Bible does.)

 

[ScaliaFan]

Nope. You sound foolish. The Father being referred to is God. Coincidentally, we have catholic father and pope. Who rule "in-the-place" of God. You need a reality check, if the catholic church interpreted the bible correctly, you need to renounce the christian faith.

this makes no sense, but what did i expect?

I do not go by YOUR interpretation of that one psg or any psg. You are not 2000 years old and ordained by Christ Himself to be Church...

 

[ScaliaFan]

If the Roman church is infallible like you say it is, why are you ashamed still to call it by it's real name? Why has this organization been involved in so many crimes against humanity over the centuries? Why does it NOT follow the Bible? Just a few questions for you to chew on!

you have been lied to about the extent of the evil (or "evil") done by the those in the Church (but you say Church Period, which is really insane, b/c all the Church is not responsible for what a few members do)i. I have studied history of the Church through the most reliable historians available.. Most people do not know history and yet they spout off about... no RE spout off about history just the same... just repeating what their anti-catholic pastor has said... That's really good academics, isn't it?

in any case even if 99% of catholics were rotten (and sometimes i have had the thought that might be the case...) that does not mean Christ failed in His Church... We look @ the saints who were true to the Church.. their stories are amazing

anyway...

 

[michaelvpardo]

in any case even if 99% of catholics were rotten (and sometimes i have had the thought that might be the case...) that does not mean Christ failed in His Church... We look @ the saints who were true to the Church.. their stories are amazing

Did someone say that Christ failed? The RCC could fall into a hole and disappear and there would still be a strong and growing vibrant body of Christ, but don't worry, there are plenty of saints still in that church and if anything were swallowed up it would most likely just be the Vatican and the college of cardinals.

 

[tom55]

There's been numerous rebellions in the RCC. At one time there were even two popes, one in France and one in Rome. Some of the rebellions were just political assassinations. The story of Pope Fortunatis' murder and trial (after his murder) is one of the more infamous stories of Papal succession. After being murdered, his successor held a trial for his body, found him guilty, cut off his fingers of blessing and had his body tossed in the river. That information comes form Roman Catholic historical documents, and a rather boring book called "The bad Popes."

Good luck with rewriting history, but you have a bit more to do. BTW, I think that it was Roman Catholics that came up with the name "protestant" as we just call ourselves saints (as the Bible does.)

Who the heck is Pope Fortunatis? I cant find him in a Google search.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Who the heck is Pope Fortunatis? I cant find him in a Google search.

Not surprising, really. You might want to ask an actual Catholic Historian (if there is such a thing.) Again, you may be able to find a copy of "The Bad Popes" which gives all historical sources, but remains an awful read.

 

[tom55]

Not surprising, really. You might want to ask an actual Catholic Historian (if there is such a thing.) Again, you may be able to find a copy of "The Bad Popes" which gives all historical sources, but remains an awful read.

The Bad Popes by ER Chamberlin??

 

[michaelvpardo]

The Bad Popes by ER Chamberlin??

Sounds familiar. Oh, and I found quite a bit about Bishop Venantius Fortunatus, who may or may not be the man in the incident cited. I don't know how common the name was, but he is well known for his poetry and hymns, lived in the 7th century and was a member of the Merovingian court. I couldn't find anything about his death in a quick search, but the Merovingians are known for their claim to be physical descendants of Christ so that may be the reason for the sketchy information available.

 

[tom55]

Sounds familiar. Oh, and I found quite a bit about Bishop Venantius Fortunatus, who may or may not be the man in the incident cited. I don't know how common the name was, but he is well known for his poetry and hymns, lived in the 7th century and was a member of the Merovingian court. I couldn't find anything about his death in a quick search, but the Merovingians are known for their claim to be physical descendants of Christ so that may be the reason for the sketchy information available.

Once again your credibility is at stake. There was no Pope Fortunatus like you stated.

The book that YOU referenced, The Bad Popes, is the history of 8 Popes and none of them are even close to the name Fortunatus.

If you are wanting to change WHO you are talking about and you really meant Bishop Venantius Fortunatus you should know that he was not murdered.

Be carful what "history" books you read. You really should try to make sure they are not anti Catholic and make sure they are true history books. Your credibility just took another hit. opcorn:

 

[michaelvpardo]

Once again your credibility is at stake. There was no Pope Fortunatus like you stated.

The book that YOU referenced, The Bad Popes, is the history of 8 Popes and none of them are even close to the name Fortunatus.

If you are wanting to change WHO you are talking about and you really meant Bishop Venantius Fortunatus you should know that he was not murdered.

Be carful what "history" books you read. You really should try to make sure they are not anti Catholic and make sure they are true history books. Your credibility just took another hit. opcorn:

Again, credibility is a meaningless thing, power is more significant. Historical works are always biased (by the opinions and world view of the authors) and I hate to break it to you, but initially in the Roman church, there was no Pope, only a bishop of Rome. When one man became ruler of the city state of Rome and also the Bishop of Rome, the office of Pope was invented.

 

[tom55]

Again, credibility is a meaningless thing, power is more significant. Historical works are always biased (by the opinions and world view of the authors) and I hate to break it to you, but initially in the Roman church, there was no Pope, only a bishop of Rome. When one man became ruler of the city state of Rome and also the Bishop of Rome, the office of Pope was invented.

"Credibility is the very last thing that I'm concerned with."

"credibility is a meaningless thing"

I hope you don't really mean that.

The office of the Pope was not "invented". Historically we know it always was the office held in Rome by the leader of the Christian faith since Peter and Paul were martyred there. It wasn't given the official name Pope until hundreds of years after the death of Peter.