-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Doing the Will of the Father is NOT how one becomes a True Christian!
John 3:18
[SUP]18 [/SUP] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
Only those who believe that Jesus IS God can enter into Heaven!
How can you do the Will of the Father if you do not believe in Jesus?
The Catholics have it all wrong! This is why Catholics are not True Christians! Only those who have received Salvation AND the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit can call themselves True Christians!
You Catholics need to REPENT and then be Baptized! Baptism does not give you Salvation, its by believing in Jesus that gives you Salvation AND the immediate Indwelling of the Holy Spirit!
John 3:18
[SUP]18 [/SUP] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
Only those who believe that Jesus IS God can enter into Heaven!
How can you do the Will of the Father if you do not believe in Jesus?
The Catholics have it all wrong! This is why Catholics are not True Christians! Only those who have received Salvation AND the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit can call themselves True Christians!
You Catholics need to REPENT and then be Baptized! Baptism does not give you Salvation, its by believing in Jesus that gives you Salvation AND the immediate Indwelling of the Holy Spirit!
M
This is very sad. I am curious to know what you have been taught about the Catholic church. All of my protestant friends can at least acknowledge that Christ started His Church over 2000 years ago and it was Catholic. I am going to make some assumptions here based on your short post. You believe in Sola Scriptura (You base everything on the Bible and nothing else). I have a few questions, where in the Bible does it say that your faith is based on the bible alone. Why would Our Lord allow his Church to teach false teachings for the first 3/4 of Her existence? Are you aware of who compiled the Bible as you know it? (hint, hint, it was the Catholic Church) I have studied almost every world religion and denomination of Christianity in the search of truth. Can I scientifically prove that Jesus is the Lord and Savior, No. However, Catholicism offers the most logical explanation, and I have yet to find any evidence against this Truth. I am open to your response.
M
You are quoting a scripture that comes from the Council of Nicea. Yes, the council of Nicea formed the Bible as you know it. I have never been able to comprehend how protestants can claim to base their whole faith on a bible that was put together by Catholics. This makes no sense philosophically or reasonably. It took over 1500 years and random people that chopped off their wife's heads to "reform the church". After studying many religions, atheism makes more sense to me than protestantism. The logic is abhorrent.
If you look at Lumen Gentium (LG), the Vatican II document from which the quote is drawn, it becomes clear that the phrase is not meant to say that Islam is a method of salvation parallel to Christianity. The quote comes from LG 16, but it is part of a larger context in the document. To appreciate how it fits into the picture, one needs to go back at least as far as LG 13, which starts by proclaiming, "All men are called to belong to the new people of God"—i.e., to the Church. Section 13 concludes by stating, "All men are called to be part of this catholic unity of the people of God. . . . And in different ways to it belong, or are related: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, for all men are called by the grace of God to salvation."
All mankind is called to the "Catholic unity of the people of God"—in other words, to become Catholics. Some have done so, and so LG states that some "belong to" the Catholic Church while others are related to it "in different ways." Those who belong to it are "the Catholic faithful," while those who are related in various ways include "others who believe in Christ" (who are related to the Church in one way) and "all mankind" (who are related to the Church in a different way).
The next three sections of LG (14–16) are taken up with elaborating on these three groups.
LG 14 concerns itself with Catholics. It begins by stating: "This sacred council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. . . . Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved."
This of itself repudiates the idea that Islam or any other religions are as good as the Catholic Church. LG 15 turns to non-Catholic Christians and states, "The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety [e.g., Protestants] or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter [e.g., Orthodox]."
Note that it does not say that these Christians are part of the Church, only that they are "linked" to it many ways, some of which it then goes on to name (Scripture, faith in Christ, baptism). While noting that God works among them, LG does not say that it is okay for them to remain where they are: "In all of Christ's disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd, and he prompts them to pursue this end." In other words, God’s grace leads them toward becoming Catholics too.
After this, the attentive reader will scarcely find it plausible that LG is going to present non-Christian religions as on a par with the Church, and it doesn’t. (which is what Jackson123 wants it to say)
Read more: http://www.catholicfidelity.com/the-catechism-on-islam-by-james-akin/
All mankind is called to the "Catholic unity of the people of God"—in other words, to become Catholics. Some have done so, and so LG states that some "belong to" the Catholic Church while others are related to it "in different ways." Those who belong to it are "the Catholic faithful," while those who are related in various ways include "others who believe in Christ" (who are related to the Church in one way) and "all mankind" (who are related to the Church in a different way).
The next three sections of LG (14–16) are taken up with elaborating on these three groups.
LG 14 concerns itself with Catholics. It begins by stating: "This sacred council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. . . . Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved."
This of itself repudiates the idea that Islam or any other religions are as good as the Catholic Church. LG 15 turns to non-Catholic Christians and states, "The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety [e.g., Protestants] or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter [e.g., Orthodox]."
Note that it does not say that these Christians are part of the Church, only that they are "linked" to it many ways, some of which it then goes on to name (Scripture, faith in Christ, baptism). While noting that God works among them, LG does not say that it is okay for them to remain where they are: "In all of Christ's disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd, and he prompts them to pursue this end." In other words, God’s grace leads them toward becoming Catholics too.
After this, the attentive reader will scarcely find it plausible that LG is going to present non-Christian religions as on a par with the Church, and it doesn’t. (which is what Jackson123 wants it to say)
Read more: http://www.catholicfidelity.com/the-catechism-on-islam-by-james-akin/
The main problem with Lumengentium II/16 is the Catholic Church is teaching a lie by saying the Muslims follow Jesus by professing the same Faith Abraham had in the Son of God.
Abraham Worshiped the Son of God who is the "I AM" in the O.T. and who is Jesus in the N.T.
Islam rejects Jesus Christ. The Muslims reject Jesus Christ.
Romans 4:3
[SUP]3 [/SUP] For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
Abraham believed in God. Jesus Christ is God. The Muslims reject Jesus as God.
The statement by the Catholic Church that the Muslims have the same Faith as Abraham is a lie.
Do you see epostle how much power Satan has over the Catholic Church?
All who reject the Son of God will never Inherit the Kingdom of God and this does includes Muslims.
Abraham Worshiped the Son of God who is the "I AM" in the O.T. and who is Jesus in the N.T.
Islam rejects Jesus Christ. The Muslims reject Jesus Christ.
Romans 4:3
[SUP]3 [/SUP] For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”
Abraham believed in God. Jesus Christ is God. The Muslims reject Jesus as God.
The statement by the Catholic Church that the Muslims have the same Faith as Abraham is a lie.
Do you see epostle how much power Satan has over the Catholic Church?
All who reject the Son of God will never Inherit the Kingdom of God and this does includes Muslims.
M
Mike,
Please give me a history on the assembly of the Bible. Please use credible sources. I'll give you some hints, it occurred during the first 400 years after Our Lord's crucifixion.
After you obtain this information, please explain why God entrusted these people with his most Holy Word.
Again, you must use CREDIBLE sources. Your pastor does not count.
We can not use the Bible as a resource until we can establish where it came from and if it is credible. Once we discuss this, then we can move on to other topics. Let's get through this logically.
Please give me a history on the assembly of the Bible. Please use credible sources. I'll give you some hints, it occurred during the first 400 years after Our Lord's crucifixion.
After you obtain this information, please explain why God entrusted these people with his most Holy Word.
Again, you must use CREDIBLE sources. Your pastor does not count.
We can not use the Bible as a resource until we can establish where it came from and if it is credible. Once we discuss this, then we can move on to other topics. Let's get through this logically.
M
Another zombie thread. :/ As if we don't already have enough catholic threads. 
This thread is over 3 years old AND the OP has NOT signed in here for OVER a year.. :/
This thread is over 3 years old AND the OP has NOT signed in here for OVER a year.. :/
Can anyone here please explain a few things (using credible sources).
Who assembled the Bible? (the correct answer is the Catholic Church over the course of about 400 years) This is not debatable among every credible historian, scholar, etc.
Why did the first disciples carry out the Sacraments that Catholics still use today? (Again, look it up, same as last question, even atheist scholars with no horse in the race acknowledge this)
I have more questions about how Christ got his Church wrong for over 1500 years before deciding to "enlighten" the reformers which has led to over 5000 denominations.
I am looking for one person bold enough to address these crucial issues, instead of dodging the questions, changing the subject, or just flat out making up their own history books with no credible reference.
The only people I have met in person that speak in the terms of "Catholics are ant-bible, satanists, etc." are part of fringe "christian" sects, otherwise known as cults. I try to believe that God gave every human the ability of reason, logic, and free will. That is why cults astound me. "My pastor told me that Catholics are evil", must be true. No need to read a history book, or more importantly the writings of the first Christians (we call them the Church Fathers). Blindly following some random person's account of something they did not experience is a cult.
I welcome responses, I do not expect them.
K
Well first I would ask what is your proof that the early church under the main Apostles and their understudies did and kept all the sacraments that the Catholic's use.
If you are talking about the Lord's supper (Holy Communion) then I can agree, because we are still to take that.
The other thing I would start off with is that true church history has the first usage of the word catholic (lower case c) was not used tell the 2nd Century (101-200 A.D.)
Meaning the early church was around for 70+ years before the term catholic was even used to describe the Church, and then it was only used to describe the universal aspect that anybody can become a believer in Christ. It was never used as a denomination term or the main term of the true Church.
That change was made in the 4th century (301-400 A.D.) when a lot of apostasy was taking root.
The true Church also is not a denomination or a building, it is the full body of true believers in Christ. Which means no matter if you are Catholic, Baptist, Protestant, or such on your buildings, if you are following Christ and His teachings then you are part of that body.
Christ Church still stands as believers are still here in the world, until the 1st Resurrection takes place the Church will always be here.
Your point is that the Catholic church has been around longer then most to all denominations is true, but the fact that apostasy and deception has infected the teachings of the Catholic church is also true.
Augustine is one of the one's that can be researched easily to find the apostasy that he turned to in the 4th Century when he started the eternal security doctrine. In that doctrine he stated both apostasy and falling away were both impossible, but the bible clearly says both do and will happen.
If you are talking about the Lord's supper (Holy Communion) then I can agree, because we are still to take that.
The other thing I would start off with is that true church history has the first usage of the word catholic (lower case c) was not used tell the 2nd Century (101-200 A.D.)
Meaning the early church was around for 70+ years before the term catholic was even used to describe the Church, and then it was only used to describe the universal aspect that anybody can become a believer in Christ. It was never used as a denomination term or the main term of the true Church.
That change was made in the 4th century (301-400 A.D.) when a lot of apostasy was taking root.
The true Church also is not a denomination or a building, it is the full body of true believers in Christ. Which means no matter if you are Catholic, Baptist, Protestant, or such on your buildings, if you are following Christ and His teachings then you are part of that body.
Christ Church still stands as believers are still here in the world, until the 1st Resurrection takes place the Church will always be here.
Your point is that the Catholic church has been around longer then most to all denominations is true, but the fact that apostasy and deception has infected the teachings of the Catholic church is also true.
Augustine is one of the one's that can be researched easily to find the apostasy that he turned to in the 4th Century when he started the eternal security doctrine. In that doctrine he stated both apostasy and falling away were both impossible, but the bible clearly says both do and will happen.
M
No, I believe you. There are some here that wish to propagate anti-Catholic propoganda with no intention to back up these false claims. You even seemed to clarify that you have no desire to know the truth, but are happy believing what you believe.
Let's try a different approach. Bill you are a satanist that wishes to exterminate all people from Brazil from the face of the planet, yet you call yourself a Christian.
Obviously I made that stuff up, but how would you take that if people started to perpetuate such a false hateful rumor?
This feels natural to look for a reasonable answer as to why some continue to do this, without offering logical and accurate explanations. Again, these are the defining characteristics of a cult. Cults are scary. They wreak havoc upon society.
Let's try a different approach. Bill you are a satanist that wishes to exterminate all people from Brazil from the face of the planet, yet you call yourself a Christian.
Obviously I made that stuff up, but how would you take that if people started to perpetuate such a false hateful rumor?
This feels natural to look for a reasonable answer as to why some continue to do this, without offering logical and accurate explanations. Again, these are the defining characteristics of a cult. Cults are scary. They wreak havoc upon society.
M
Well, you kind of proved my point again that nobody will answer my simple and direct questions. However, I will follow your lead for the sake of Truth. I will quote one early Church Father (for the sake of brevity), if you wish to read more I will post as many as you like.
St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach when he was a boy and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr's crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena.
St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach when he was a boy and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr's crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena.
"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."
Again, I can cite more early Church Fathers saying the same things. I can also cite agnostic historians that concede these same points. They have no reason to care either way, they simply acknowledge what history tells us. Atheists and agnostics alike acknowledge that Catholics are the first Christians and have not changed the core beliefs. These groups do not agree with Catholics at all, but at least have the ability to be objective about what history says. There basic premise is "Christians are stupid for believing in a God, however it began with the Catholic Church and they have continued their weird teachings for 2000 years. Sometime in the 1500's people realized they can manipulate people to follow whatever beliefs suit their needs."
Can you answer my questions?
"Letter to the Smyrnaeans", paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.
"Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ."-"Letter to the Ephesians", paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.
"I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed."-"Letter to the Romans", paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.
"Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons."-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.
These quotes are straightforward enough, so I won't waste your time explaining them. If you wish to dispute their historical accuracy, I will gladly provide further resources.
Again, I can cite more early Church Fathers saying the same things. I can also cite agnostic historians that concede these same points. They have no reason to care either way, they simply acknowledge what history tells us. Atheists and agnostics alike acknowledge that Catholics are the first Christians and have not changed the core beliefs. These groups do not agree with Catholics at all, but at least have the ability to be objective about what history says. There basic premise is "Christians are stupid for believing in a God, however it began with the Catholic Church and they have continued their weird teachings for 2000 years. Sometime in the 1500's people realized they can manipulate people to follow whatever beliefs suit their needs."
Can you answer my questions?
Yes, men who were led by God out of the false beliefs of the Roman Church, put the Bible together in their language because the Roman priest had forbade anyone to have one in their possession. This is why its called the Dark Ages. God use men like Luther, Huss, Jerome and others to publish and spread the gospel of truth of which the Roman Church fought so hard to keep the Light out of the hands of the people. The people would no longer be ignorant to the truth and will be able to discern the false lies of the church of Rome.
There is nothing so particular about men of the Catholic faith being moved by God to come out of Babylon. He does this of every nation, tongue, and people. Yet still the Catholic system is a corrupt and false system. God says He has sheep of every fold. This is yes He said that when He comes, He will gather all of His saints from every corner of the earth.
Jesus never failed to instruct His people through the Holy Spirit. There was apostasy even of the Jewish nation as it had been in every nation of people.
Why are you blaming Christ for the disobedience of His people? Jesus has never been wrong. If He is ad you say, then brother you are doomed to be lost and there is no hope for you.
You obviously believe in the doctrine of the pope who claims to be God on earth.
The Catholic System still bases it doctrine on superstition. They believe that the people should not read the Bible for themselves and believe Christ is their Mediator and Redeemer. They don't believe that pure sinless blood was shed for the remission of sins. So if this being the case, where is Grace that they be saved?
K
What is your point here as I already said that the Lord's supper (Holy Communion) or the Eucharist as the Catholic's call it is to be done.
I did not disagree with that in my previous post, so this does not prove me wrong in any way.
I was speaking on all the sacraments Catholic's do, not just the Lord's supper.
As for the Catholic's putting the bible together I don't think anybody disagrees with that, however the letters/epistles and gospel books already existed for many years before the bible was finally assembled.
You state Catholic's have never changed their core beliefs, but did you know for many years they did preach that unless you were in the Catholic church you were not saved. That has only changed over the past 20 years, same as with other things the Catholic church has taught for years that they have made changes on.
The Catholic church has a number of teachings that are not biblically supported, like Mary being sinless !!!
The other thing they have done that can not be denied is that they have done away with the 2nd commandment, and to keep it at 10 they split the 10th commandment about coveting in two.
Look I am not one who preaches hatred toward Catholic's nor do I condemn them as some do as we are told not to treat and judge others in such a way or we will face that same judgment to.
I will however as the Word of God says point out teachings that contradict scripture, and a few past pope's have made statements that what they say is to be obeyed rather it contradicts scripture or not.
Changing or adding to God's word is very dangerous and warned by God Himself not to do !!!
So what are the rest of your questions ???
I already started by giving you the true timeline on when the Catholic church started, and I did that because the Catholic church gives a false history that it existed since Peter as Peter as they claim was the first pope.
Peter can't be a pope when that position and the church didn't even exist in his time !!!
M
Yikes, I am not sure where to start on this gem. I will do my best to keep this orderly and logical.
In regards to your first paragraph, do you acknowledge that the Catholic Church assembled the Bible? I am guessing that you do accept this fact, but are giving credit to the reformers for translating it. The first "English" translations were actually done by monks in the 700's (it was actually Anglo-Saxon, but pretty much English). I am attempting to save space in many of these posts, but I can and will post actual quotes from actual texts of these periods. I am not sure if you are aware that the Bible was written in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic and was translated to Latin because that was the language of the time. The Church did very well in keeping up with its translations through history.
I ask you to find me better scholars in these languages, than Catholics. I ask you who is responsible for education of the masses (the Catholic Church).
Paragraph 2 is nonsense, and sounds like something you made up with no evidence, similar to me saying " I have superpowers and can fly, prove me wrong". I apologize, but don't know how to logically respond to this.
Paragraphs 3 and 4, I believe you misunderstood me. Christ and the Holy Spirit did NOT get it wrong. I'm asking you why they would allow the Church to get it wrong for over 1500 years until deciding to allow His people to get it right and make these massive changes. I was being somewhat sarcastic and I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Final paragraph, what superstition do you speak of? We can continue with this paragraph if you can answer this question.
And finally, can you answer my original questions? I keep asking and nobody will, doesn't this worry anyone reading this?
In regards to your first paragraph, do you acknowledge that the Catholic Church assembled the Bible? I am guessing that you do accept this fact, but are giving credit to the reformers for translating it. The first "English" translations were actually done by monks in the 700's (it was actually Anglo-Saxon, but pretty much English). I am attempting to save space in many of these posts, but I can and will post actual quotes from actual texts of these periods. I am not sure if you are aware that the Bible was written in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic and was translated to Latin because that was the language of the time. The Church did very well in keeping up with its translations through history.
I ask you to find me better scholars in these languages, than Catholics. I ask you who is responsible for education of the masses (the Catholic Church).
Paragraph 2 is nonsense, and sounds like something you made up with no evidence, similar to me saying " I have superpowers and can fly, prove me wrong". I apologize, but don't know how to logically respond to this.
Paragraphs 3 and 4, I believe you misunderstood me. Christ and the Holy Spirit did NOT get it wrong. I'm asking you why they would allow the Church to get it wrong for over 1500 years until deciding to allow His people to get it right and make these massive changes. I was being somewhat sarcastic and I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Final paragraph, what superstition do you speak of? We can continue with this paragraph if you can answer this question.
And finally, can you answer my original questions? I keep asking and nobody will, doesn't this worry anyone reading this?
The question remains..why does it matter about who are better scholars?...what is most important..the scholars..or those who take God at His word. God used who He chose to write and translate...I don't think the post that people posted about the Catholic System had anything to do with language and scholars...what they have posted..is about the Roman church being a false system..this is why u may not get an argument from anyone..this still has no bearing on who the anti-christ is. No one can get any credit...God chooses whom He chooses to get His work done. Man cannot get any credit for what God does.
Yes they are responsible for the education of the masses..but its a false education that totally removes Christ. Man's philosophy. This is why the educational system is failing.
M
Thank you for proving my point from a logical basis. We'll try this a different way.
The Bible is written in Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew. These translations can be somewhat difficult. It requires knowledgeable SCHOLARS to translate them properly. The first translations were to Latin (undisputed). Many disagreements occur on the many English translations.
SO, we must look at the most credible SCHOLARS to translate. If you are fluent in those three languages, then please inform me. Otherwise, I will take the translations of the most credible SCHOLARS in the world.
As for your most recent post (last paragraph), you speak of the false education. Catholic schools around the globe educate children at the most successful rate in mathematics, sciences (physics, chemistry, biology, medical science, theology, philosophy, etc.) They pray the Lord's prayer every hour on the hour. They study the Bible. How is this removing Christ?
Thank you in advance again, because I know you will not answer this question. You're making me look much smarter than I am.
The Bible is written in Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew. These translations can be somewhat difficult. It requires knowledgeable SCHOLARS to translate them properly. The first translations were to Latin (undisputed). Many disagreements occur on the many English translations.
SO, we must look at the most credible SCHOLARS to translate. If you are fluent in those three languages, then please inform me. Otherwise, I will take the translations of the most credible SCHOLARS in the world.
As for your most recent post (last paragraph), you speak of the false education. Catholic schools around the globe educate children at the most successful rate in mathematics, sciences (physics, chemistry, biology, medical science, theology, philosophy, etc.) They pray the Lord's prayer every hour on the hour. They study the Bible. How is this removing Christ?
Thank you in advance again, because I know you will not answer this question. You're making me look much smarter than I am.
K
Are you kidding me? Catholicism is the easiest false religion to disprove. Scripture itself speaks against it's basics...
Do not call anyone on earth father (in a religious sense) for you have one Father and He's in heaven.
They like to wear their tassels long and love the praise of men and the best seats.
They forbid people to marry and to abstain from certain foods- which are things taught by demons.
All authority belongs to Christ, and although He appointed elders in congregations, only He is the authority over all the congregation's of His church.
Scripture is finished, do not add to it or take away from it.
The only way we or our words get to the Father is through the Son. For there is only one mediator between God and men- the man Jesus Christ. (Is Mary a man? Is she Jesus Christ? Did she die to reconcile you back to God? Is there any scripture saying we should pray to her or through her with beads that we can't wear as a necklace? (Ridiculous)
The false prophet will sit on the thrown of the church and claim he is God. (I witnessed with my own eyes people fall down and worship the pope, and even as a young child I refused to do so.
Freely you have received, freely give. They charge to light prayer candles, to baptize, to marry, to hear a sermon. I went with my bf once so that he would also try my church, and the priest said he wants fifty dollars for everyone in your family because another priest is coming soon, and he deserves it.
They said to study the bible on your own shows distrust to the priests, yet scripture says those who were of noble character studied daily to see if what the apostles said was true.
The he bible says all Gods children are saints and priests of God- not that a few individuals are voted such by men.
The he bible says to confess your faults one to another- not to a man in a box.
Saying Hail Mary's does not forgive sins, only Christ's blood does.
Relics such as beads, crosses, and statues are idols, and therefore idolatry.
Peter was not the first pope, the Rock is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Catholicism just does not match the bible.
Do not call anyone on earth father (in a religious sense) for you have one Father and He's in heaven.
They like to wear their tassels long and love the praise of men and the best seats.
They forbid people to marry and to abstain from certain foods- which are things taught by demons.
All authority belongs to Christ, and although He appointed elders in congregations, only He is the authority over all the congregation's of His church.
Scripture is finished, do not add to it or take away from it.
The only way we or our words get to the Father is through the Son. For there is only one mediator between God and men- the man Jesus Christ. (Is Mary a man? Is she Jesus Christ? Did she die to reconcile you back to God? Is there any scripture saying we should pray to her or through her with beads that we can't wear as a necklace? (Ridiculous)
The false prophet will sit on the thrown of the church and claim he is God. (I witnessed with my own eyes people fall down and worship the pope, and even as a young child I refused to do so.
Freely you have received, freely give. They charge to light prayer candles, to baptize, to marry, to hear a sermon. I went with my bf once so that he would also try my church, and the priest said he wants fifty dollars for everyone in your family because another priest is coming soon, and he deserves it.
They said to study the bible on your own shows distrust to the priests, yet scripture says those who were of noble character studied daily to see if what the apostles said was true.
The he bible says all Gods children are saints and priests of God- not that a few individuals are voted such by men.
The he bible says to confess your faults one to another- not to a man in a box.
Saying Hail Mary's does not forgive sins, only Christ's blood does.
Relics such as beads, crosses, and statues are idols, and therefore idolatry.
Peter was not the first pope, the Rock is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Catholicism just does not match the bible.
Last edited:
What you say is true, but few books of the New Testament were universally accepted for many years before the bible was finally assembled. Sorry to say, about half the people in this forum don't accept this historical fact.
At the time the phrase "no salvation outside the Catholic Church" was coined, there was only one church. The phrase did not take into account the divisions that would occur 200 years later. The phrase has not changed, but reformulated to include all the baptized as Christians as related to us. The Catholic Church formally recognized other churches as a means of salvation and sources of grace and truth, so the Catholic Church is far more inclusive than you may realize. See CCC817, 818, 819 . The Church has the authority to make changes in liturgy or disciplinary issues, but cannot change the deposit of faith, such as Scripture or what was handed down from the Apostles. It is impossible for the Catholic Church to "change" or invent doctrine. Development does not mean change. To accept the development of the Bible, including development within the Bible, but reject all doctrinal development afterwards, reduces the Bible to a dead letter.
Biblical support has been posted several times, and a sinful Mary is a post-reformist invention made popular in the last 50 years. Your complaint of Catholics inventing doctrine is hypocritical. Furthermore, there is no biblical support for the man-made doctrine of sola scriptura.
All the commandments are still there.
The Catholic Church Changed The Ten Commandments?
Did the Catholic Church Change the Ten Commandments? | Catholic Answers
So, no, we did not change God’s law, we just list the wording differently to what you do. And also, not all Catholics do that. Many Catholics use EXACTLY the same ten commandments as you Adventists and Protestants do! In fact, Martin Luther, and most Lutherans today, use the same numbering system as Catholics in the west!
Not one of the ten commandments has been edited, rejected, or changed by the Catholic Church. However, for the sake of making memorisation of the crux of the commandment easier, the longer ones have been abbreviated. I have seen SDA listings of the 10 commandments, including the 4th one – most of them read “Keep the Sabbath day holy” or something like that. They do NOT list the full 4th commandment, so it is very unfair and hypocritical to expect the RCC to do what is not expected of the SDA Church. Just Who Did Change The Ten Commandments? | Catholicism and Adventism
There are no Catholic teachings that contradict scripture; they may, however, contradict private interpretation of scripture, which Scripture tells us not to do! 2 Peter 1:2 , 2 Peter 3:16
Do you mean God's written word that was preserved, compiled and proclaimed by the Catholic Church? And do you have a verse that says "God's word" means only the written word? Put "Word of God" in any bible search engine. There is not a single instance in the entire Bible where it means the written word alone, that is a man-made invention.
A true timeline of the history of the Catholic Church would include all the councils that proved inspiration of scripture, the refutations of heresies, the early Church Fathers, non-biblical historians with collaborative evidence, etc. it would take several pages, so no, you gave no true timeline of the Church's history. The term "Pope" as a title for Peter was not used during his life time. The term was also applied to other leaders of certain districts, but Peter's role as leader of the Apostles is abundantly clear. Terms and titles do not define Peter's role, Jesus did that when He gave Peter, and only Peter, the Keys of the Kingdom.
Scripture Catholic - THE PRIMACY OF PETER <<a list of 60+ verses supporting Peter's role as leader.
At the time the phrase "no salvation outside the Catholic Church" was coined, there was only one church. The phrase did not take into account the divisions that would occur 200 years later. The phrase has not changed, but reformulated to include all the baptized as Christians as related to us. The Catholic Church formally recognized other churches as a means of salvation and sources of grace and truth, so the Catholic Church is far more inclusive than you may realize. See CCC817, 818, 819 . The Church has the authority to make changes in liturgy or disciplinary issues, but cannot change the deposit of faith, such as Scripture or what was handed down from the Apostles. It is impossible for the Catholic Church to "change" or invent doctrine. Development does not mean change. To accept the development of the Bible, including development within the Bible, but reject all doctrinal development afterwards, reduces the Bible to a dead letter.
By development of doctrine, we mean that some divinely revealed truth has become more deeply understood and more clearly perceived than it had been before. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whom Christ promised to send to teach us, the Church comes to see more deeply what she had always believed, and the resulting insights find expression in devotion of the faithful that may have been quite uncommon in the Church's previous history. The whole spectrum of Christology and Mariology has witnessed such dogmatic progress. http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/pea/history.htm
Biblical support has been posted several times, and a sinful Mary is a post-reformist invention made popular in the last 50 years. Your complaint of Catholics inventing doctrine is hypocritical. Furthermore, there is no biblical support for the man-made doctrine of sola scriptura.
All the commandments are still there.
The Catholic Church Changed The Ten Commandments?
Did the Catholic Church Change the Ten Commandments? | Catholic Answers
So, no, we did not change God’s law, we just list the wording differently to what you do. And also, not all Catholics do that. Many Catholics use EXACTLY the same ten commandments as you Adventists and Protestants do! In fact, Martin Luther, and most Lutherans today, use the same numbering system as Catholics in the west!
Not one of the ten commandments has been edited, rejected, or changed by the Catholic Church. However, for the sake of making memorisation of the crux of the commandment easier, the longer ones have been abbreviated. I have seen SDA listings of the 10 commandments, including the 4th one – most of them read “Keep the Sabbath day holy” or something like that. They do NOT list the full 4th commandment, so it is very unfair and hypocritical to expect the RCC to do what is not expected of the SDA Church. Just Who Did Change The Ten Commandments? | Catholicism and Adventism
There are no Catholic teachings that contradict scripture; they may, however, contradict private interpretation of scripture, which Scripture tells us not to do! 2 Peter 1:2 , 2 Peter 3:16
Do you mean God's written word that was preserved, compiled and proclaimed by the Catholic Church? And do you have a verse that says "God's word" means only the written word? Put "Word of God" in any bible search engine. There is not a single instance in the entire Bible where it means the written word alone, that is a man-made invention.
A true timeline of the history of the Catholic Church would include all the councils that proved inspiration of scripture, the refutations of heresies, the early Church Fathers, non-biblical historians with collaborative evidence, etc. it would take several pages, so no, you gave no true timeline of the Church's history. The term "Pope" as a title for Peter was not used during his life time. The term was also applied to other leaders of certain districts, but Peter's role as leader of the Apostles is abundantly clear. Terms and titles do not define Peter's role, Jesus did that when He gave Peter, and only Peter, the Keys of the Kingdom.
Scripture Catholic - THE PRIMACY OF PETER <<a list of 60+ verses supporting Peter's role as leader.