Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Vizio:</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Your views are not incorrect. They are just different due to your condition of being a Protestant. As I said: My religious views are no better or worse than yours.
Julian, did you vote for Obama?
Last edited by GoodToBeHome; 01-06-2014 at 11:21 PM..
And I will point out that your church has declared that they are the only true church. In fact, my beliefs were anathematized by your church several centuries ago.
As it should be.
Last edited by GoodToBeHome; 01-06-2014 at 11:21 PM..
Accepting God and His Word is a lot different than serving the Idol of the GreatWhore of Revelations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by janelle144
And that thinking comes directly from hate sites on Catholics. I know what you have been reading and studying. So sad really.
The tragedy is that it is a dubious interpretation from the most enigmatic and incomprehensible book in the Bible . . . yet they pretend it is obvious and easy to see in the mumbo jumbo of symbolic writing in that book. He even gets the title wrong, it is Revelation . . . not Revelations. Really, really sad and pathetic coming from someone who claims to be a Christian, janelle!!! Not very Christ-like at all.
I woldnt say mainstream Christianity is better than Catholicism as much of what they do is based of Catholicism anyways in regards to the holidays they celebrate, the day they worship, and couple of other things.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The couple of main questions I asked are the heart of Catholic doctrine and go against the scripture. God said to follow his word, not man made traditions. If a disaster wiped out most of man kind and the only thing left was a bible, they would follow that and not the traditions the Catholic church has passed down.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Always remember Christianity formed by allowing alot of Pagn doctirne to merge with the church in order to keep former pagans happy and make the merge to Christianity easier for them, so to say Catholicism has Sacred Oral Tradition has to make you question where some of the traditions came from.
The bible does indeed teach us to hold fast to tradition whether by word of mouth or by letter. 2 Thessalonians 2:15.
The bible's very construction is based on over 300 years of traditions that came before it.
The gates of hell will not prevail against His Church. That's in the Bible, too.
Did you skip parts?
Last edited by GoodToBeHome; 01-06-2014 at 11:25 PM..
The tragedy is that it is a dubious interpretation from the most enigmatic and incomprehensible book in the Bible . . . yet they pretend it is obvious and easy to see in the mumbo jumbo of symbolic writing in that book. He even gets the title wrong, it is Revelation . . . not Revelations. Really, really sad and pathetic coming from someone who claims to be a Christian, janelle!!! Not very Christ-like at all.
But it is typical of people who get sucked into that hate literature and sites. It's to be expected.
If you think that it is right to curse believers of other churches and to burn them when they do not believe their dogmas and join their "faith". What I found out that the RCC has cursed every Catholic that does not believe all their dogmas. This is a cursing church, I would run, if I would be a Catholic. This is about salvation and not just a game.
Father Kennedy said hot cross buns were originally eaten on Good Friday to remind people of the day Jesus died on the cross.
But Murdoch University’s Associate Professor of Church History, Rowan Strong, says the origins of the hot cross bun, or “cross bunsâ€, as he calls them (history suggests they weren’t always hot) are “shrouded in mysteryâ€.
“Some speculate they may have had their origins in pagan customs which Christians took over,†Strong said. “But they are certainly well-attested in the medieval period, where they were associated with Easter, and were particularly eaten on Good Friday, because of the association with the crucifixion.â€
“Protestant reformers in England disliked the practice. For them, it was associated with Catholic superstition.†Strong says the practice of eating hot cross buns was prolific enough to warrant Elizabeth I’s government to legislate that bakers could only make them at Easter and Christmas.
Revd Dr Andrew McGowan, Warden of Trinity College at The University of Melbourne, says the history of the hot cross bun, or at least the cross-shaped marking, could go even further back, to Ancient Rome.
“There were breads marked with cross-shapes in the ancient world, allowing diners to easily divide loaves into four pieces.†From Eternity Newspaper CHRISTIAN LIVING | Kaley Payne
You still need to explain Matthew 16:19 where Jesus gives Peter the keys and the authority.
Jesus said this;
Matt. 16:18, "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it.
Then later said this;
Matthew 18:18 “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.
Catholic Answers would have you believe this;
"Binding and loosing" is a phrase which comes from the rabbis. It refers to the authority to make decisions binding on the people of God.
This authority includes interpreting and applying the Word of God and admitting people to and excommunicating them from the community of faith. For the Jews this meant the community of Israel. For Christians this means the Church.
In Matthew 16:19 Jesus gives this authority over his Church to Peter: "Whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven."
In Matthew 18:18, he gives the power to all the apostles: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven."
This singling out of Peter to bestow on him an authority which is later to be given to all the apostles shows Peter's preeminence within the apostolic college. What the apostles as a whole possessed as leaders of the Church, Peter possessed as an individual.
Of course, he, as the earthly head of the Church, also possessed powers which all the other apostles, even collectively, didn't possess: "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 16:19).
I believe more along these lines;
Quote:
Assuming Jesus was addressing Peter in Matthew 16:19, some interpret this to mean that Peter had the authority to allow or disallow access to the Kingdom of God. This explanation has two inherent errors. First, although Jesus said something specifically to Peter in verse 18, He included all the disciples in His comments in verse 19.
This is reflected in related verses where the Greek for the pronoun "you" is plural ("ye" in the King James Version). Matthew 18:18 says, "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (emphasis added throughout). John 20:23 says: "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained."
Second, it's erroneous to think any man could allow someone into the Kingdom of God whom God would not allow into it. Similarly, no man could disallow someone access to the Kingdom whom God would invite into it.
The Greek in Matthew 16:19 (as well as Matthew 18:18 and John 20:23) is not always clearly translated. These actions are called "future perfect passives" and can be rendered, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven" (New American Standard Bible, Updated Edition). God is not obligated to bind an ungodly decision. In other words, Christ would lead the Church leadership to decisions that He had already bound in heaven, not vice versa.
Anciently, when one came to seek the king's help or counsel, the servant's job was to open the door to the king's house and assist him in reaching the king. Christ's servants, the ministry, have a similar responsibility to assist those God is calling in coming to their King, Jesus Christ.
Christ showed that the religious teachers of His day, who had access to the knowledge of God's ways, had failed in this duty. "Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in you hindered" (Luke 11:52). Occasionally, the ministry has the sad duty to inform some that because of their choices and actions, the doors to the kingdom are being closed to them unless they repent. See 1 Corinthians 5 or 2 Thessalonians 3:14
.
Revelation 3:7 speaks plainly of Jesus having the key. In ancient Israel, the human king was in fact the steward of God, the true King of the land. Similarly, the divine Christ will be the steward of His Father's Kingdom. With that authority, Jesus could allow or disallow someone entrance into the Kingdom—but no man had or has that authority. Christ's statement in Matthew 16:19 meant that His apostles had authority to represent Him, to teach as He taught them and to be instruments in helping people live the way the Kingdom of God. Christ still lends His authority to His true ministers today to do the same work. Sadly, many falsely claim this authority and misuse it. (From The Church Jesus Built)
Does having a different view of scripture make me anti-Catholic or a Catholic hater? Whatever. God knows my heart.
Does having a different view of scripture make me anti-Catholic or a Catholic hater? Whatever. God knows my heart.
It is perfectly OK to discuss these issues and it is obvious when the poster is not a hater.
There are many sincere good will people that are simply curious and want to go beyond what they hear at their own church or from the mouth of the minister.
There are many protestants that study these issues very deeply and quite often they gain enormous understanding. Some Protestant ministers that study catholicism even convert to Catholicism. Paradoxically the poorly educated Catholic may leave the CC and the highly educated Protestant may return home to Catholicism.
Peter is always singled out in the Gospels. He is mentioned first and his name appears many more times than the name of the other Apostles. Peter resurrected the dead and walked on water with Jesus. I don't think anyone can deny the supremacy of Peter among the Apostles. Unfortunately, Paul who was much more educated came into the picture too late and never walked with Jesus.
The CC was the first mainline Christian group and seized the moment with Mathew 16:18-19. Who would not jump at that opportunity?
Lastly, many that dislike the CC confuse the culture of Catholicism with Christianity. The devotion to Mary is but a side dish and not part of the mass.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whatever. God knows my heart.
