Are the Roman Catholic Church Biblical?

[MoreCoffee]

Books do not exercise authority, people using a book might impose their opinions about what the book means on others. The authority that one might acknowledge in the words of scripture is, of course, an acknowledgement of God's supreme authority coupled with respect for what is in the book. Nevertheless the book itself urges Christians to follow the way of Christ and to show love for one another as Christ has loved his church.

In other words, you want the Bible to be seen as standing on its own merits and considered self-explanatory when it can be read to support the Roman Catholic Church's claims to jurisdiction; but otherwise, it is just a book that is "an inanimate object. It has no ears to hear, no eyes to see, and no brain to interpret itself." And you don't see an inherent contradiction in that view?

No; you know better than to twist what I wrote. You ought to avoid doing that.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Oh well. At least I didn't have to get baptized a third time when I entered into full communion with the Catholic Church!

That's a blessing

Mind you, adult baptism according to the Roman rite does not usually involve copious amounts of water

 

[WisdomTree]

That's a blessing

Mind you, adult baptism according to the Roman rite does not usually involve copious amounts of water

So if I wanted a bath with my baptism, I should go the Byzantines?

I was baptized by Baptists, so I had a nice warm bath then. (I was a credo-baptist back then)

 

[By Faith Alone]

In other words, you want the Bible to be seen as standing on its own merits and considered self-explanatory when it can be read to support the Roman Catholic Church's claims to jurisdiction; but otherwise, it is just a book that is "an inanimate object. It has no ears to hear, no eyes to see, and no brain to interpret itself." And you don't see an inherent contradiction in that view?

You have twisted nothing. The proof is in the pudding.

I have great disdain at the thought the only TRUE communion is held within the confines of a single, identified by name, ecclesiastical clique.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Books do not exercise authority, people using a book might impose their opinions about what the book means on others. The authority that one might acknowledge in the words of scripture is, of course, an acknowledgement of God's supreme authority coupled with respect for what is in the book. Nevertheless the book itself urges Christians to follow the way of Christ and to show love for one another as Christ has loved his church. In the end the book is, as sister Jan001 rightly said, a book and as such is not alive and powerful and sharper that a razor enabling one to separate bone from marrow and spirit from soul; that authority belongs to the Word of God rather than to a book.

exactly .. did God really become book and live among us?

 

[Albion]

exactly .. did God really become book and live among us?

How do you know that he became a man and lived among us? Oh, that's right. It's because of a book.

 

[Jan001]

In other words, you want the Bible to be seen as standing on its own merits and considered self-explanatory when it can be read to support the Roman Catholic Church's claims to jurisdiction; but otherwise, it is just a book that is "an inanimate object. It has no ears to hear, no eyes to see, and no brain to interpret itself." And you don't see an inherent contradiction in that view?

The Bible is not self-explanatory nor does it have any authority by itself.

2 Peter 3:15-17
.....our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;

Proponents of the Islam religion, the Muslims believe and claim that their own book, the Koran, is holy and that it is the word of God/Allah. Since they make this claim, why aren't you Muslim?

Proponents of the Catholic Christian religion, The Catholics believe and claim that their own book, the Bible, is holy and that it is the word of God.

So, why do you believe the Catholics about their book (or the Protestants about their abridged Catholic book) instead of believing the Muslims about their book?

To illustrate further: Let's say that you are a young child again, and your Muslim father places his Koran on the kitchen table and your Christian mother places her Bible on the kitchen table and they both ask you to choose which one of these you will follow. How would you choose?


For myself:
I am Catholic Christian instead of any other religion because I believe that the Catholic Church is telling me the truth about what is in her book and where it came from.

About 1600 years ago, the Catholic Church's bishops finally finished deciding which ones of their many different writings and which ones of the OT writings should be compiled into one book for their Church. The Holy Spirit guided them in their choices as to which writings were to be put into their book. And since they've always believed that everything in their Book is the word of God, they have continually preserved and revered its contents up to[FONT=&quot] and including[/FONT] the present day.

However, 500 years ago, some dissident Catholics decided to remove some of the books from the Bible and to make some new doctrines which contradicted the Catholic's doctrines. In doing this, they drew many people away from the Catholic Church and her teachings and formed new assemblies based upon their new Bible and their new teachings.

 

[Albion]

You have twisted nothing.

I know. But I appreciate you recognizing that fact.

 

[Albion]

The Bible is not self-explanatory nor does it have any authority by itself.

This is why the question of this thread ("Is the Roman Catholic Church Biblical?") was asked, I'm guessing. If it the church's teachings are not based upon the word of God, they can only be based upon men's ideas.

And it's pretty clear from how enthusiastically several of you Catholics are aguing that the Bible is nothing but a book, that you are answering the question of the thread in the negative.

 

[plmarquette]

we all have sinned and come short... 1 John 1.8-9
magisterium = Jethro, Moses, rulers of congregation
one seat one chair ...Aaron and his seed... high priest...
sacrifice of the mass.. "applying the blood to new believers, as oft as you do this"
what ever you give up for the gospels sake will be multiplied and returned to you both in this life and the one to come ...Mary and children , intercession...

some say 2 sacraments, others say 4 , practice 7 (command , ordinance, extra-grace)

communion / lord's supper ; penance - 1 Jn 1.9 ; matrimony - marriage 3 fold cord; baptism of water and spirit -- baptism and confirmation ; last rites... James 5.15 / prayer of faith ....holy orders ... ministry ...

5 fold ministry + government + hospitality...

 

[Rhamiel]

You have twisted nothing. The proof is in the pudding.

I have great disdain at the thought the only TRUE communion is held within the confines of a single, identified by name, ecclesiastical clique.

I am sure the Herodians and Sadducees said the same thing about the followers of Jesus

 

[StudentOfTheScriptures]

This post will be closed

 

[prodromos]

Please link to the historical evidence for your claim. Thanks.

Seriously?

 

[SwordFall]

I guess. It's just that I'm uncertain whether I was baptized as an infant or not.

We Catholics believe baptism is supernatural, cleansing us of Original Sin. Doesn't require permission.

But you already know that
Protestants don't though

 

[Second Phoenix]

Whether or not one decides to follow God's revelation might be just a personal opinion, that's true.

But then again, Jan was wrong to say "The Bible is an inanimate object. It has no ears to hear, no eyes to see, and no brain to interpret itself. It can exercise no authority."

right?

And she would be correct. The bible doesn't interpret itself. It is interpreted in the mind of the reader.

 

[Second Phoenix]

The point was the Creed of Nicea was changed by subsequent Councils. Filioque.

Nope, Please stop posting until you know about these issues.

 

[Second Phoenix]

But no so right that additions were made to it.

You can argue it was for clarifications sake, but others would say it changed things.

Additions were not made.

 

[kellhus]

I have heard over and over that the Roman Catholic Church or Catholic (For that matter) is the True Church of Jesus Christ. My lack of understanding regarding the statement of the RCC is the fundamentals they teach is in dire contradiction with the Holy Word of God aka The Bible.

Salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation is by baptismal regeneration and is maintained through the Catholic sacraments unless a willful act of sin is committed that breaks the state of sanctifying grace. The Bible teaches that we are saved by grace which is received through simple faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), and that good works are the result of a change of the heart wrought in salvation (Ephesians 2:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17) and the fruit of that new life in Christ (John 15).

Assurance of salvation: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that salvation cannot be guaranteed or assured. 1 John 5:13 states that the letter of 1 John was written for the purpose of assuring believers of the CERTAINTY of their salvation.

Good Works: The Roman Catholic Church states that Christians are saved by meritorious works (beginning with baptism) and that salvation is maintained by good works (receiving the sacraments, confession of sin to a priest, etc.) The Bible states that Christians are saved by grace through faith, totally apart from works (Titus 3:5; Ephesians 2:8-9; Galatians 3:10-11; Romans 3:19-24).

Baptism: In the New Testament baptism is ALWAYS practiced AFTER saving faith in Christ. Baptism is not the means of salvation; it is faith in the Gospel that saves (1 Corinthians 1:14-18; Romans 10:13-17). The Roman Catholic Church teaches baptismal regeneration of infants, a practice never found in Scripture. The only possible hint of infant baptism in the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church can point to is that the whole household of the Philippian jailer was baptized in Acts 16:33. However, the context nowhere mentions infants. Acts 16:31 declares that salvation is by faith. Paul spoke to all of the household in verse 32, and the whole household believed (verse 34). This passage only supports the baptism of those who have already believed, not of infants.

Prayer: The Roman Catholic Church teaches Catholics to not only pray to God, but also to petition Mary and the saints for their prayers. Contrary to this, we are taught in Scripture to only pray to God (Matthew 6:9; Luke 18:1-7).

Priesthood: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is a distinction between the clergy and the "lay people," whereas the New Testament teaches the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9).

Sacraments: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that a believer is infused with grace upon reception of the sacraments. Such teaching is nowhere found in Scripture.

Confession: The Roman Catholic Church teaches that unless a believer is hindered, the only way to receive the forgiveness of sins is by confessing them to a priest. Contrary to this, Scripture teaches that confession of sins is to be made to God (1 John 1:9).

Mary: The Roman Catholic Church teaches, among other things, that Mary is the Queen of Heaven, a perpetual virgin, and the co-redemptress who ascended into heaven. In Scripture, she is portrayed as an obedient, believing servant of God, who became the mother of Jesus. None of the other attributes mentioned by the Roman Catholic Church have any basis in the Bible. The idea of Mary being the co-redemptress and another mediator between God and man is not only extra-biblical (found only outside of Scripture), but is also unbiblical (contrary to Scripture). Acts 4:12 declares that Jesus is the only redeemer. 1 Timothy 2:5 proclaims that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men.

Many other examples could be given. These issues alone clearly identify the Catholic Church as being unbiblical. Every Christian denomination has traditions and practices that are not explicitly based on Scripture. That is why Scripture must be the standard of Christian faith and practice. The Word of God is always true and reliable. The same cannot be said of church tradition. Our guideline is to be: "What does Scripture say?" (Romans 4:3; Galatians 4:30; Acts 17:11). 2 Timothy 3:16-17 declares, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." (Taken from Gotquestions.org)

I have done research into the matter as I once joined a Catholic Church and learned things. The more I read the Bible the more the Catholic Church seemed to disagree with Scripture. Now I am directing a question to any Catholics who reads this. The teachings of the Catholic Church are listed above. Scriptures that refutes the teachings are above. Take the time to look up the Scripture. Now answer me one question Is the RCC right in their teachings and Gods word is worth nothing but garbage to cast aside as not truth or is the Bible right?

Now finally...to clarify...I love you and it is my desire that you know the truth so you may be set free from the deceptions of the RCC church. I too was almost deceived by the teachings and by Gods Grace he led me to the truth...His Word..The Bible. My prayer is that you look in the Bible and let it be your only source of a Truth.

 

[Second Phoenix]

Interestingly RC said this "The bishop said, ``As we know, the LDS Church baptizes all its new members who were previously baptized in any other church. That practice indicated that the LDS Church regards its own baptism as accomplishing something which is substantially different from that of all other baptismal rites.’’ - See more at: The Catholic Review > Vatican ruling on Mormon baptism clarifies Catholic practice"

That was Stephen's argument! He said Marcion, Apelles, etc don't rebaptize their members, therefore we (RC) accept their heretical baptisms as valid.

What you said makes no sense. That wasn't Stephen's argument, not even close.
That's not what they were doing. The LDS intention is different. Being heretical doesn't mean your intention changes.

 

[SwordFall]

I really hope it's understood that Protestant theology is universally built on Filioque as well.

It's a definitive dogma of Western Christianity.
Just sayin'- don't let paranoia of Church doctrine show_