Then please show me all the additional practices of the RCC in Scripture. For where is the bowing down to statues being acceptable? Where is communicating to Mary and the other saints as being acceptable? Where is the practice of the RCC version's of the Eucharist seen in Scripture? Where is a figure like pope parading around and being adored by other believers seen in Scripture?
Alright so you simply want to ignore what people say, thats fine. I find it funny however, that you profress that you love the Bible so much, and yet according to your profile you don't even use a full Bible. You perfer the KJV.
Before you said salvation is interwined with Mary.
Vatican 2 says: "Mary, the Mother of God…is united with indissoluble bonds to the saving work of her Son."
In an article in an RCC newspaper (September 12, 1993) it says this about Mary: "Sprinkled throughout the Catholic liturgical year are feasts celebrating the Blessed Virgin Mary's role in human salvation and how she continues to intercede for people at God's right hand."
I don't see how this contradicts what I said.....? There are indissoluble bonds between Mary and the saving works of her Son, Jesus. He is her son. This kind of makes sense.
Where did I say I had a thing against Catholics? I didn't. I merely disagreed with their teachings even as a child. I was not influenced by the Catholic church and I could see it from an unbiased viewpoint as a person who just prayed to the Lord directly. Nowhere will you find in the Bible that we are to pray to Mary and the dead saints. We are told to pray to God in the Bible (and not dead people).
We don't pray to dead people, we ask those in Heaven to pray for us. This is infered from the Bible, which means that in total context you can see this, however it is not "clearly" stated in a single verse in the Bible. Which alot of things arent, they are infered from the Scripture.
Sorry, it is not a strawman. I was looking at things from the perspective of a child who was not influenced by the RCC. I later accepted Jesus in 1992, but I was able to see things clearly even as a child long before I became born again. Jesus said we have to be converted and become like children, or we cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. I believe my view as a child (who was not influenced) was able to see things very clearly. My testimony has even more weight now today because Jesus has transformed my life since that day I accepted Him in 1992.
Irrelevent to the topic at hand.
Sorry, I do not believe in man made historical documents. Ever heard of the saying, History is written by the victors? Surely nobody wants to be the loser within their own history books. Folks want to always make themselves out to be the heroes. The only book we can trust thru out history is God's Word.
Then why listen to the Bible? As the Bible was written by human hand, and then it was the humans in the Catholic Church in the late 4th century that finally put all the books of the Bible together and declared them to be divinely inspired and sacred scripture. Without the Church you would have no Bible.
I believe the Catholic faith has not always stayed the same. It's teachings keep changing over the years in a subtle way. You can see this for yourself with the teachings from the various holy men within it (Who made new doctrine traditions) thru out history. But you can believe whatever you like. But you should be an expert on all the added traditions written down by your church and you should be able to explain them. For me, I see nothing but contradictions in them. I also do not see any evidence that they are divine works like the Word of God, either.
The Catholic Faith has always stayed the same, and taught the same since Jesus built it. Which cannot be said for many protestant denominations.
Because he wasn't speaking literally. If Jesus was speaking literally, then that would mean Jesus desired to have all of his disciples biting and eating Him. That would not have been good at all seeing He still needed to go to the cross so as to die for man's sins.
Also, Jesus is not obligated to share truth with a person if they do not get it. The disciples did not understand or believe Jesus's statement on the resurrection until after He was risen and they had seen Him.
He was too speaking literally, because in the original Greek writing of the Bible, Jesus used the word tro-go, which translates to gnawing or chewing. This is not a metahpor, it is literal. Hense also why at the last supper Jesus said "this is my body" "this is my blood"
The deciples were not stupid as many seem to think. They knew exactly what Jesus was saying, which is why many of them left after that testomony. It is the only time in the Bible in which Jesus loses desciples.
Most people think of "time" existing in the same way as it does in the movies. That is, a person can travel to the past or the future. That the past, present, and future all exist simultaneously. Sorry, but time doesn't work like that. If it did, then that would mean God would have to be a slave to time. Meaning, God would still be creating everything in six literal 24 hour days as we speak in some dimension of time known as the past. This would mean that God did not really stop or rest from His work on day 7. This would also mean that Jesus did not really mean "It is finished" when He was upon the cross. For Jesus would still be saying this over and over and over and over again thru out some dimension of time somewhere. That doesn't make any sense.
None of this makes sense, God created time, therefore God lives outside of time and space. He sees all, past present and future.
Scripture has to be compared and read with other Scripture. You cannot take one verse and read out of context to the rest of the Bible. We see nowhere in the Bible where Christ's followers had absolved sin for people. In other words, you are gonna have to show me where else the Bible clearly shows that His people forgave sins. On the contrary, John tells us not to sin and if we do sin we have an advocate that we can go to named Jesus. There is no mention of how they can come to John and be forgiven (See
1 John 2:1-2,
1 John 1:9).
However that is exactly what you JUST did and have been doing, taking 1 or 2 verses out without context. I gave you context, you simply choose not to believe it. However it is there in black and white in the bible. "whos sins you forgive are forgiven, and whos sins you retain are retained."
So basically I show you proof, and then you want more proof because you cannot admit that you are wrong. Funny.
Notice that Jesus does not say that Peter is the rock. Jesus does not say, Peter. You are the rock and upon you will I build my church. Jesus does not say that. In fact, Peter says that Jesus is the rock (
1 Peter 2:7). Paul says Jesus is the rock (
1 Corinthians 10:4). You cannot have two people being the rock or the foundation of the church. In fact, Paul says that no man can lay any foundation but Jesus Christ (
1 Corinthians 3:11). So Jesus is the foundation of the church. Not Peter! Even if you wanted to make Peter the foundation it would not work, because Jesus says there is none good but God (
Mark 10:18). It is merely the goodness of God that we allow to flow thru our lives. We are nothing in and of ourselves (without God) (See
Galatians 6:3).
....YES HE DID!
Jesus spoke in Aramaic, and Peter in Aramaic is Kepha! Kepha translates to Rock, so Jesus is literally saying "I shall call you Kepha, and on this Kepha I will build my Church."
It is right there in black and white! Jesus made Peter the head of His earthly Church body, while Jesus is the rock of the ENTIRE Church body, both on earth and in Heaven.
It is right there, you just choose to not believe it.
