Human Sacrifice
Bless and do not curse
- Oct 7, 2016
- 180
- 49
- 35
- Country
- Virgin Islands, U.S.
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I swear if I see anything else about Revelation 17 and 18 in this thread I'm going to throw up.
@Jeepneytravel - do you have anything of substance?
Those Bible quotes make you nauseaus...too bad, get used to it, Rome doesn't like the Bible, and it's time it learned about it's fate.
Those Bible quotes make you nauseaus...too bad, get used to it, Rome doesn't like the Bible, and it's time it learned about it's fate.
Rome doesn't like the Bible? Now, THAT's funny!
Christ wanted his church to be one; I suspect lack of charity from one Christian sect to another must be quite disappointing to him.
They have changed it. Heard about the second vatican council? There the catholic church made it clear that they believed themselves to be in communion with the orthodox church. It is the orthodox church that(correctly) sees that it is the catholics that strayed way from early christian doctrine and therefore cannot agree to be in communion with catholics until they change some of their late invented dogmas. As for protestantism, they have some things right, but now days mostly resembles some sort of weird gnosticism guilty of bibliolatryOf course, the Catholic church recognizes all other Christian bodies, except itself, as sects. It and it alone, according to itself, is the One, True and Holy Catholic Church to which all others must be united as Christ intended.
If, and when, Rome determines to change that position there might be hope of true unity.
Of course, the Catholic church recognizes all other Christian bodies, except itself, as sects. It and it alone, according to itself, is the One, True and Holy Catholic Church to which all others must be united as Christ intended.
If, and when, Rome determines to change that position there might be hope of true unity.
I am talking about the Orthodox Church... Haven't you heard of it? If you know your history you will see that it was the Roman Catholic Church, and not the Orthodox Church, that started to change and and things. The pope didn't have all power alone from the beginning. He was the first among equals, not the only one. Then suddenly he wanted to be the only one. And then the latins started to add things to the nicene creed(filioque) and other things, and there you go.If u know your history you will know that the Catholic Church was the only one. It was the original church.
It's when Luther came along that all these other 1,000s of denominations sprung up!
They have changed it. Heard about the second vatican council? There the catholic church made it clear that they believed themselves to be in communion with the orthodox church. It is the orthodox church that(correctly) sees that it is the catholics that strayed way from early christian doctrine and therefore cannot agree to be in communion with catholics until they change some of their late invented dogmas.
Yes, essentially he was correct. The catholics still believe they are right(or at least they say so), but sometimes I think it is more a matter of finding it hard to suddenly, after 1500 years of saying they alone are right and that the pope is the vicar of Christ on earth, say "We were wrong, the orthodox church was always right". That would be a scandal.You're right about the RCC and Orthodoxy...and something might also be said vis-a-vis the Old Catholics. But it's a sliver of a concession only. The points made by bbbbbbb are essentially correct, Vatican II or not.
They have changed it. Heard about the second vatican council? There the catholic church made it clear that they believed themselves to be in communion with the orthodox church. It is the orthodox church that(correctly) sees that it is the catholics that strayed way from early christian doctrine and therefore cannot agree to be in communion with catholics until they change some of their late invented dogmas. As for protestantism, they have some things right, but now days mostly resembles some sort of weird gnosticism guilty of bibliolatry
I am talking about the Orthodox Church... Haven't you heard of it? If you know your history you will see that it was the Roman Catholic Church, and not the Orthodox Church, that started to change and and things. The pope didn't have all power alone from the beginning. He was the first among equals, not the only one. Then suddenly he wanted to be the only one. And then the latins started to add things to the nicene creed(filioque) and other things, and there you go.
Now you speak of protestantism, I have no respect for protestantism. It is not christianity. Of course there are some christians within protestantism historically that I admire, but other than that, it is a serious distortion of everything that christianity stands for.
That might be true. And mind you, I respect the Catholic Church, mostly for its rich culture, history, tradition... And also for its many great spiritual geniuses, like John the Cross, Meister Eckehart etc. And the spirit of Augustine, even though his soteriology is quite calvinistic, is definitely catholic and not protestant. The evangelicals etc. commits a crime of dishonesty when they claim Augustine as being one of their own. He was a catholic.And, Roman is not a term used by the Catholic Church. It was made up by Anglicans nearly 200 years ago!
The evangelicals etc. commits a crime of dishonesty when they claim Augustine as being one of their own. He was a catholic.
Hmm. I've never actually heard St. Augustine described by one of them as having been a Presbyterian or a Lutheran or as a member of any other Protestant church body. Of course, he was a catholic only in the sense that he lived before Christianity split into various separate communions.
You're right about the RCC and Orthodoxy...and something might also be said vis-a-vis the Old Catholics. But it's a sliver of a concession only. The points made by bbbbbbb are essentially correct, Vatican II or not.
Actually at that point unity will no longer be possible.Of course, the Catholic church recognizes all other Christian bodies, except itself, as sects. It and it alone, according to itself, is the One, True and Holy Catholic Church to which all others must be united as Christ intended.
If, and when, Rome determines to change that position there might be hope of true unity.
Yes it would be scandal if Rome accepted the Ecclesiastical innovations of the Greeks.Yes, essentially he was correct. The catholics still believe they are right(or at least they say so), but sometimes I think it is more a matter of finding it hard to suddenly, after 1500 years of saying they alone are right and that the pope is the vicar of Christ on earth, say "We were wrong, the orthodox church was always right". That would be a scandal.
And, Roman is not a term used by the Catholic Church. It was made up by Anglicans nearly 200 years ago!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?