How many agree with this

[LittleLambofJesus]

By constant you of course mean constant changing going further and further from scripture...


Put down the catechism (never pick it up again) and pick up the bible (never set it down again) would be my suggestion...Start in Romans then John then Galatians.

Nah. Start in John, then Romans then Isaiah.

 

[ScottBot]

By constant you of course mean constant changing going further and further from scripture...


Put down the catechism (never pick it up again) and pick up the bible (never set it down again) would be my suggestion...Start in Romans then John then Galatians.

Thank you Prophet Simon. You have shown me the errors of my ways.

 

[simonthezealot]

Nah. Start in John, then Romans then Isaiah.

Scott's studied John I am confident of that just not in light of Romans...

 

[ScottBot]

Scott's studied John I am confident of that just not in light of Romans...

I've studied the whole thing in light of the whole thing, including the Deuterocannon. From outside Catholicism and from within Catholicism. To me, the whole thing makes more sense from my side of the Tiber.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Haven't you read Unam Sanctum?

If you are Christian you are under the Rule of the Roman Catholic Church.

lol

Not so much bring down catholicism, rather resurrect truths.
If you guys can't accept being corrected and desire to continually follow WRONG teaching thats fine, but being here trying to lead others to it is only going to draw us people you guys like to label anti-catholics here, because we will stand up for scriptural truths and the salvation we share at any cost. You guys are unable to bend on what the church teaches so your only reason for being here is to promote their teachings...So it makes sense when you all get backed into a corner you run and hide.

so...we're the stubborn people who come to an online forum to promote our church, and, no doubt, lead others astray like we have been lead astray. then you guys come to save the day. lol. with the Bible in hand. (as if we've never read it). and we, being mere pawns of Rome, have no answer to your brilliant Scriptural arguments and are backed into a corner and run away.

On whose authority do you speak though? Catholicism is backed up by 2000 years of Church history, the Bible, and the leading of the Holy Spirit. We do not go against the Scriptures, but against *your* interpretation of Scriptures. How do you know you are interpreting the Bible correctly and we are not?

Our interpretation of the Bible is not based on our own understanding (I know I have very little) and is not 'individual' but comes from the Church, which Christ said would never be overtaken by the enemy. He is protecting it. And He gave the keys to Apostle Peter, not to each person. Chrisitianity is not "every man for himself".

I really like you Monica you speak with much more grace than I am able to...But c'mon this stuff is clear as day admit it...

It's not clear at all brother. I used to think as you do but now I don't anymore.

What else is new. ALL GT THREADS LEAD TO ROME. Its the nature of the thing.

true

 

[MoNiCa4316]

This would have been a good thread to make a poll on.

Have at it.

Here are some recommended poll options I think everyone here can agree on.

1. Islam does not worship the same god as Jews and Christians and the Catholic Church is apostate.

2. Islam does worship the same God as the Jews and Christians and the Catholic Church is apostate.

3. I don't care what god Islam worships, all I know is that the Catholic Church is apostate.

4. Islam? What is that? (oh, and the Catholic Church is apostate.

5. I need a refill on my coffee before I answer. However, I am pretty sure the Catholic Church is apostate.

love it i think you've covered every possible answer here brother.

 

[Trento]

By constant you of course mean constant changing going further and further from scripture...


Put down the catechism (never pick it up again) and pick up the bible (never set it down again) would be my suggestion...Start in Romans then John then Galatians.

There are Reasons why your suggestion should be avoided. Here are a few.

The Bible alone does not teach that the Bible alone is the basis of faith and morals.

John wrote: "I have much to write to you, but I do not wish to write with pen and ink. Instead, I hope to see you soon when we can talk face to face" (3 John 13). Why would the apostle emphasize his preference for oral Tradition over written Tradition.


Bible alone separates Church and Scripture. But they are one. They are not two rival horses in the authority race, but one rider (the Church) on one horse (Scripture)., We are not taught by a teacher without a book or by a book without a teacher, but by one teacher, the Church, with one book, Scripture.

The successors of the apostles, the bishops of the Church, decided on the canon, the list of books to be declared scriptural and infallible. And if the Scripture is infallible, then its cause, the Church, must also be infallible.

Denominationalism is an intolerable scandal by scriptural standards -- see John 17:20-23 and I Corinthians 1:10-17. But let five hundred people interpret the Bible without Church authority and there will soon be five hundred denominations. So rejection of authoritative apostolic tradition leads to the unbiblical scandal of denominationalism.

The first generation of Christians did not have the New Testament, only the Church to teach them. This being the case, using the Bible alone without apostolic tradition was not possible. Infallible guidance in interpreting the Bible comes from the church. One of the criteria used to determine this is the unanimous consent of the Fathers.

 

[TraderJack]

Originally Posted by Albion
Question. If one says he worships X but reinvents X to be the opposite in most ways from what X actually is, can we honestly say he's worshipping X?

If I say, for example, that I worship JFK (there is a church that does) because of his wonderful emancipation of the slaves and because he wrote the US Constitution, am I worshipping JFK or not??

X cannot change.

That is not what is under question.

The definition of X can change.

It's NOT the word, God, itself but how God is defined and described that determines whether the True God is being described or a false god is.

Would you say the same thing of the Mormons? Is their God the same as Roman Catholicism's?

 

[TraderJack]

BUT...

They know God as Yehwah and they know God as the Holy Spirit. They do not know God as Jesus. So it seems to me that it is the same God but that they do not know him as well as Christians do.

What are your thoughts?

Jesus said He IS Jahweh:

John 8

37 “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. 38 I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with[l] your father.”
39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”
Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. 41 You do the deeds of your father.”
Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

Before Abraham Was, I AM



48 Then the Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?”
49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 50 And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 51 Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.”
52 Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon! Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word he shall never taste death.’ 53 Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?”
54 Jesus answered, “If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your[m] God. 55 Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple,[n] going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Those Pharisees knew exactly that Jesus was saying He IS Yahweh(I AM), and picked up stones to stone Him for blasphemy.

The Jews nor Muslims know Yahweh because they do not know Jesus.

They worship a god made in their own image.

 

[TraderJack]

I wonder if those under the RULE of the Roman church understand the ramifications of what is being clearly presented in this thread?

One of the following must be right...

1.) the Pope and magisterium are wrong
2.) Christ and scripture are wrong

or

3.) they themselves are worshipping a false God the God of islam.

That pretty well nails it down.

 

[TraderJack]

The sting of truth affects different people differently...

John 8

37 “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. 38 I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with[l] your father.”
39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”
Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. 41 You do the deeds of your father.”
Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

Before Abraham Was, I AM


48 Then the Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?”
49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 50 And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges. 51 Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.”
52 Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon! Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word he shall never taste death.’ 53 Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?”
54 Jesus answered, “If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your[m] God. 55 Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple,[n] going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Like that, and what we see coming from the Romans.

 

[TraderJack]

Originally Posted by MoNiCa4316
I think this is just another thread meant to bring down Catholicism. That's the reason it was started. I'm through with it. Goodbye

Sorry to see you go we are just now getting to the heart of the matter.

The return didn't take long, like a moth drawn to the flame.

 

[TraderJack]

Originally Posted by TraderJack
Is Unam Sanctum an ex cathedra document?

No one really knows. Its not like the Pope puts a header on the document and says "This proclamation is made ex cathedra."

I see. So, according to you, there is no way to determine if something is ex cathedra or not.

Strange, that's a new one on me.

The Catholic Encyclopedia, as well as lots of other Roman Catholic sources say it is.

But then, on the other hand, many Roman Catholics on boards like this say it is not.

Which is just one among many things Roman Catholics cannot agree on and are divided over.

 

[PassthePeace1]

I wonder if those under the RULE of the Roman church understand the ramifications of what is being clearly presented in this thread?

One of the following must be right...

1.) the Pope and magisterium are wrong
2.) Christ and scripture are wrong

or

3.) they themselves are worshipping a false God the God of islam.

4.) Pope Simon's interpretation of scripture are wrong.

 

[Rick Otto]

No one really knows. Its not like the Pope puts a header on the document and says "This proclamation is made ex cathedra."

"None realy knows", excuse me, but that sounds hilarious coming from someone whose church claims to have the "fullness of truth".
The Vatican produces a document, and "no one realy knows" its value.
The pope can be infallible, but "no one realy knows" when.
They always leave themselves a back door that is hinged on a technicality.

 

[PassthePeace1]

Originally Posted by TraderJack
Why do you reject the Words of Christ Jesus is what I want to know?


Sure you do. I posted them earlier, twice and you reject them in favor of man made traditions.

No, I don't. I just don't agree with your man-made self interpretation of them.

 

[mont974x4]

No, I don't. I just don't agree with your man-made self interpretation of them.

That's OK, we reject the man-made interpretations and unbiblical traditions of men from your denomination too.

 

[ScottBot]

That's OK, we reject the man-made interpretations and unbiblical traditions of men from your denomination too.

We reject yours as well.

 

[Rick Otto]

Interpretation is not the same as understanding.
Roman Catholic confusion of terms is Standard Operating Procedure.

Re: Unam Sanctum from The Catholic Encyclopedia:
" The genuineness of the Bull is absolutely established by the entry of it in the official registers of the papal Briefs, and its incorporation in the canon law."

"The Bull lays down dogmatic propositions on the unity of the Church, the necessity of belonging to it for eternal salvation, the position of the pope as supreme head of the Church, and the duty thence arising of submission to the pope in order to belong to the Church and thus to attain salvation."

"The main propositions of the Bull are the following: First, the unity of the Church and its necessity for salvation are declared and established by various passages from the Bible and by reference to the one Ark of the Flood, and to the seamless garment of Christ. The pope then affirms that, as the unity of the body of the Church so is the unity of its head established in Peter and his successors. Consequently, all who wish to belong to the fold of Christ are placed under the dominion of Peter and his successors. When, therefore, the Greeks and others say they are not subject to the authority of Peter and his successors, they thus acknowledge that they do not belong to Christ's sheep."
Worse yet...
"The Bull also proclaims the subjection of the secular power to the spiritual as the one higher in rank, and draws from it the conclusion that the representatives of the spiritual power can install the possessors of secular authority and exercise judgment over their administration, should it be contrary to Christian law.

Since world domination is the obvious quest, it is curious how the Protocols Of The Elders of Zion got hung around the neck of the Jews.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by mont974x4
That's OK, we reject the man-made interpretations and unbiblical traditions of men from your denomination too

We reject yours as well.

I reject both of yours!!!