Roman church errors and inventions

LittleLambofJesus said:

Interesting.
I was in a discussion with Muslims on the NCR board awhile back and one of them brought up about a mummy that was found which they believe to be the Pharaoh mentioned in Exodus of the Bible.
I will try and find it. Peace.

Click to expand...

There are a lot of Egyptian mummies. Trying to fit the one of the Exodus would be very difficult.

However, there is an excellent book by an Egyptian historian who submits that they present dating system for the Egyptian kingdoms and pharoahs is all wrong. Presently it places Rameses II as the Pharoah of the Exodus, but he places the Exodus at a later period under another Pharoah whom I have forgotten the name of.

I'll see if I can locate the book. I think yule find it interesting.

EmperorConstantine said:

But you are wrong. People are not dead. For to die would mean that there is no everlasting life after the body died. Thus, there is no salvation with that thinking.

Click to expand...

As a point of clarity so your do not mistake what they or I are saying.

When we say those saints or people are dead, we are not saying that their spirit ceases to exist.

The context that we say they are dead is, that their earthly, physical bodies have ceased to have life in them and that they have passes from existence in this physical realm and space/time continuum and into the next.

So, do not mistake our term as a denial of the afterlife, because it is not.

LittleLambofJesus said:

What is the spirit doing while it is waiting?

Click to expand...

The spirit of those who are Redeemed by the Precious Blood of Christ are in the Presence of the Lord.

2 Corinthians 5;

2 Corinthians 5

Assurance of the Resurrection



1 For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven, 3 if indeed, having been clothed, we shall not be found naked. 4 For we who are in this tent groan, being burdened, not because we want to be unclothed, but further clothed, that mortality may be swallowed up by life. 5 Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.
6 So we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. 7 For we walk by faith, not by sight. 8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

Click to expand...

Wasn't JESUS resurrected whole but incorruptible? Just curious.

Click to expand...

And so will those who are Redeemed by the Blood of Christ given a new body, free of all corruption.

TraderJack said:

The spirit of those who are Redeemed by the Precious Blood of Christ are in the Presence of the Lord.

2 Corinthians 5;

And so will those who are Redeemed by the Blood of Christ given a new body, free of all corruption.

Click to expand...

I suppose that begs the question of what that "first resurrection" is symbolizing in the Jewish/Hebrew book of Revelation.

If I am not mistaken, the Roman church believes they are presently in that mysterious "1000yr period".

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Luke 2:34 And Simon blesses them and said toward Mariam, the mother of Him, "Lo, this-one is set/lying for the Falling and Ressurection/anastasin <386> in many to-the Israel, and into a Sign spoken against"--[Ezekiel 37 "valley of bones"?]

Reve 11:11 And after the three days and half a spirit of life out of the God into-came in them, and they stand/esthsan <2476> (5627) upon their feet, and great fear falls upon those seeing them.

Reve 20:5 The rest of the dead-ones not live until should be being finished the thousand years. This the Resurrection/anastasiV <386>, the First/prwth <4413>.

LittleLambofJesus said:

I suppose that begs the question of what that "first resurrection" is symbolizing in the Jewish/Hebrew book of Revelation.

Click to expand...

That is the believer's Resurrection.

The believers are Resurrected first.

Non-believers are also resurrected and given a body that is prepared for eternity in hell, which is the "second death", with death being the metaphor for an eternity apart from the love, grace and mercy of God, but rather one of eternal judgment.

Roman church errors and inventions

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by tadoflamb

Hmmmmm, let me think on that one.....................

Click to expand...

tadoflamb said:

Still thinking ..........................

Click to expand...

Must have retreated back to OBOB to think about it.

http://christianforums.com/t6926307-call-to-boycott-gt.html

If I have time I will go thru this thread and sift all the relevant posts concerning the OP and thanks for all that responded!!! God bless.

Philothei said:

Inventions:
-Infallability of the Pope
-Papal supremacy
-Immaculate coneption
-purgatory
Errors:
-Vatican I and II(not the councells but their decisions....although II was worse than I)
-indulgencies
-crusades
-Vatican City.... (never should have been a "seperate state"but goes hand in hand with the Papal supreority)

Click to expand...

Thanks philothei

Originally Posted by EmperorConstantine

Scholasticism
Filioque
Papal Supremacy
Immaculate Conception

Click to expand...

TraderJack said:

assumption of mary

submission to the pope of Rome being absolutely neccessary for salvation

penance to atone for sins committed after baptism

auricular confession

sacerdotal sacramentalism

meritorious works for the attainment of salvation

the whole Roman system of justification

Click to expand...

bump............

This is a list of all the errors brought up on this thread and some may be duplicates, but feel free to edit those out.

Scholasticism
Filioque
Papal Supremacy
Immaculate Conception
Inventions:
-Infallability of the Pope
-Papal supremacy
-Immaculate coneption
-purgatory
Errors:
-Vatican I and II(not the councells but their decisions....although II was worse than I)
-indulgencies
-crusades
-Vatican City.... (never should have been a "seperate state"but goes hand in hand with the Papal supreority)

um, I got one, well kind of, not an error by the Pope but some errors made by a Catholic King and Catholic Monk.
Luthernism and Anglicanism
As for Immaculate Conception, to say that the Theotokos could be born without the possibility to sin is to say that she is not human. We Orthodox believe that she could have sinned, yet lived a sinless life. Besides, this dogma was never agreed upon by the entire Church, not just Rome, before the Schism.

Change in Paschalion.
But, just for kicks and because of the after effects we still see... Crusades.
Lack of fasting. In my opinion, it seems that since Vatican II Roman Catholic fasting has taken a downturn both in "how often" and effectiveness.
assumption of mary

submission to the pope of Rome being absolutely neccessary for salvation

penance to atone for sins committed after baptism

auricular confession

sacerdotal sacramentalism

meritorious works for the attainment of salvation

the whole Roman system of justification
Lateran IV

Unam Sanctum

Trent

Vatican I

Vatican II

the papacy

the Marian dogmas

the dogma of papal infallibility

auricular confession and penance

sacerdotal sacramentalism

purgatory

indugences

transubstantiation

and admit that the Roman religion was built upon the deceptions and frauds of forgeries invented during the dark ages
When the pope added the Filioque, he essentially put an end to the Creed that was agreed upon in Nicea and Constantinople; both of which never had the Filioque in the Creed.
Scholasticism: came about in the 13th century. Brought reason to theology. Unhealthy mix. Like oil and water.

Filioque: a Spanish king first introduced it in the 6th century at a local council in Toledo. Later flaunted by Charlemagne.

Papal Supremacy: long history. Either way, only observed in the Patriarchate of the West and later attempted to force onto the East.

Immaculate Conception: whomever the pope was in 1854.
The Immaculate Conception has it's roots in Eastern theology not western theology.

The whole comining paganism and Christianity thing really is very uncool.
The Papacy itself!!!

Don't leave out the other major forgeries that along with the Donation of Constantine became the foundation of Roman Catholicism:

"The Thesaurus of Greek Fathers"---a total fraud

"The Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals"---a total fraud

"Liber Pontificalis"----likewise a fraud
The pope of Rome doesn't hold the "keys to the kingdom"---
One of the canons of Nicea also stated that no bishop shall intrude on another bishop's turf.
1. Cotton instead of black leather cassocks & habits.
2. Batter frying instead of butter frying on Friday nights.
3. Allowing freedom of speech & religion.
4. Neglecting to canonize Mary Jo Kopeckne.
5. Apologizing for anything whatsoever.
6. Underfunding the Inquisitions
7. Neglecting Mary
8. Over veneration of Joseph
9. Not increasing the distance between clergy & laity.
10. Using chimes instead of flame-pots for mia culpas.
11. Not putting discount coupons for indulgences inthe confessionals
Oh, so it isn't of pagan origin to pray to the dead?

It isn't of pagan origin to have temple/churches dedicated to gods/saints?

It isn't an intermingling of pganism and Christianity to substitute worship of Babylonian gods with Mary and mary/child?

It isn't poor form to adopt rosary beads, an ancient pagan method of reciting prayers?
Mother and child worship
Mary worship
Saints, saints' days & praying to saints
Obelisks, temples & towers
The cross
'Holy' relics
Religious frauds such as indulgences
Peter as the first pope
Pagan origins of the Papal office
Infallibility of popes
Celibacy of the priesthood
Mass & practices therein
Religous festivals, such as fish on Good Friday
Christmas.

bump.........

I kinda get a kick out of how you mention a lot of names and condemn them as errors when you clearly have no understanding of them. You list a bunch of Catholic sounding stuff and call it an 'error'- I doubt you know very much about them at all, much less could construe an argument against them.

What I find particularly funny is your mentioning of the filoque, which is acknowledged by virtually all protestant churches... telling me you really don't know what you are talking about.

Mass & practices therein
Religous festivals, such as fish on Good Friday

Click to expand...

Just a couple of my favorites.

Mass and "practices therein"... right.
I do like you calling Good Friday a "religious festival" and mentioning fish.

I sincerely suggest you stick to the topics you know something about if you are going to call them an error.
How on Earth can you call Good Friday a 'religious festival'? What is wrong with Good Friday? Are you denying scripture now?

SpiritualAntiseptic said:

I kinda get a kick out of how you mention a lot of names and condemn them as errors when you clearly have no understanding of them. You list a bunch of Catholic sounding stuff and call it an 'error'- I doubt you know very much about them at all, much less could construe an argument against them.

What I find particularly funny is your mentioning of the filoque, which is acknowledged by virtually all protestant churches... telling me you really don't know what you are talking about.

Click to expand...

Your right. I leave that up to my fellow Christians who are more knowledgable about that than I am.
I am purely a Scripture only type of Christian.

http://christianforums.com/t6756657-the-papacy-how-did-it-really-come-about.html
the-papacy-how-did-it-really-come-about.

TraderJack said:

Under the right conditions, dryness being one, bones or flesh can last a thousands of years.

There are bones and natural mummies discovered all the time.

Here is a DVD produced by the "History Channel" that you can get on the subject:

http://store.aetv.com/html/product/index.jhtml?id=76475

Click to expand...

You are comparing the wrong things.

I was responding to NoDoubt's words:
"Do you mean like dinosaur bones? They are REALLY old!"

I have no doubt that bones can be mumified but this is not 'like (what happens to) dinosaur bones' which is fossilization

squint said:

Who said the bodies of Moses and Elijah were phantoms? Who said the bodies of the saints were phantoms?

Click to expand...

Squint, whom I responded to said (post #190) 'It might "appear" to SOME that Moses and Elijah already had their "bodies"' that is, he is casting doubt that they were actual bodies

I was refuting that.

bump......interesting thread

Rhamiel said:

um, I got one, well kind of, not an error by the Pope but some errors made by a Catholic King and Catholic Monk.
Luthernism and Anglicanism

Click to expand...

JacktheCatholic said:

Click to expand...

Now, what about the rest of the rather "lenghthy list"