republicanchick
New member
so we can put you down as adhering to the notion that Marin Luther (human being) knows more about how a Church should be run than Jesus Christ, who founded The Original
ok
+
anticatholics: please list the "false doctrines of Catholicism"
- Thread starter republicanchick
- Start date
so we can put you down as adhering to the notion that Marin Luther (human being) knows more about how a Church should be run than Jesus Christ, who founded The Original
ok
+
HisServant
New member
Given that Jesus never ran a church... ever.. and the church arose AFTER his death... I find that line of thought puzzling.
And if Jesus did start a church, he would have done so where he lived and taught... Jerusalem... not in the capital of his enemy... whom he cursed for all eternity.
So you come down to the decision of who was more political motivated... the Romans or Luther... more politics = more corruption.. which will inevitably make you arrive at the fact that the Roman Church is the most corrupt institution that has ever existed on this planet...
So the decision is really a no brainer.... anything but Rome has a better chance at being the 1 true church (although I do not believe that Jesus promised his followers that an institution would arise after him).
republicanchick
New member
given that JEsus said he would BUILD His Church and the gates of Hell would [NEVER] prevail against it
I find that line of thought puzzling
__
anticatholics: please list the "false doctrines of Catholicism"
anticatholics: please list the "false doctrines of Catholicism"
There are problems with the Roman Catholic position. First of all, when we look at the Greek of Matthew 16:18, we see something that is not obvious in the English. " . . . you are Peter (πέτρος, petros) and upon this rock (πέτρα, petra) I will build My church . . . "
In Greek, nouns have gender. It is similar to the English words actor and actress. The first is masculine, and the second is feminine. Likewise, the Greek word, "petros," is masculine, petra" is feminine. Peter, the man, is appropriately referred to as Petros. But Jesus said that the rock He would build His church on was not the masculine "petros" but the feminine "petra."
Let me illustrate by using the words "actor" and "actress:" "You are the actor, and with this actress, I will make my movie." Do see that the gender influences how a sentence is understood? Jesus was not saying that the church will be built upon Peter but upon something else.
Jesus, who knew the heart of Peter, was not saying that Peter, the movable and unstable stone, would be the immovable rock upon which the Church would be built. Rather, it would be built upon Jesus, and it was this truth that Peter had affirmed what he said to Jesus, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God," (Matt. 16:16). This is consistent with Scripture elsewhere where the term rock is sometimes used in reference of God but never of a man.
Deut. 32:4, "The Rock! His work is perfect, for all His ways are just; a God of faithfulness and without injustice."
2 Sam. 22:2-3, "The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; 3 My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge."
The truth is that the only foundation is Jesus. The only rock of truth is Jesus Christ and that we, as His redeemed, need to keep our eyes on Him. We are to look to no one else as the foundation, the source, or the hope on which the church is built. The Church is built upon Jesus--not Peter.
"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ," (1 Cor. 3:11).
anticatholics: please list the "false doctrines of Catholicism"
There are problems with the Roman Catholic position. First of all, when we look at the Greek of Matthew 16:18, we see something that is not obvious in the English. " . . . you are Peter (πέτρος, petros) and upon this rock (πέτρα, petra) I will build My church . . . "
In Greek, nouns have gender. It is similar to the English words actor and actress. The first is masculine, and the second is feminine. Likewise, the Greek word, "petros," is masculine, petra" is feminine. Peter, the man, is appropriately referred to as Petros. But Jesus said that the rock He would build His church on was not the masculine "petros" but the feminine "petra."
Let me illustrate by using the words "actor" and "actress:" "You are the actor, and with this actress, I will make my movie." Do see that the gender influences how a sentence is understood? Jesus was not saying that the church will be built upon Peter but upon something else.
Jesus, who knew the heart of Peter, was not saying that Peter, the movable and unstable stone, would be the immovable rock upon which the Church would be built. Rather, it would be built upon Jesus, and it was this truth that Peter had affirmed what he said to Jesus, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God," (Matt. 16:16). This is consistent with Scripture elsewhere where the term rock is sometimes used in reference of God but never of a man.
Deut. 32:4, "The Rock! His work is perfect, for all His ways are just; a God of faithfulness and without injustice."
2 Sam. 22:2-3, "The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; 3 My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge."
The truth is that the only foundation is Jesus. The only rock of truth is Jesus Christ and that we, as His redeemed, need to keep our eyes on Him. We are to look to no one else as the foundation, the source, or the hope on which the church is built. The Church is built upon Jesus--not Peter.
"For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ," (1 Cor. 3:11).
HisServant
New member
He trained Jewish disciples to start a church in the city of David.. the capital of his chosen people (which applied until he resurrected).
Not a single disciple was a Roman...
If he wanted it in Rome... don't you think he would have trained a Roman citizen?
Your loyalty defies logic.
:yawn: We aren't anti-Catholic. :freak: We are anti-lies, deceit, homo/pedophile rapists, etc. Ga 5:9
See:
Catholicism
republicanchick
New member
one small problem:
Jesus did not speak Greek
and Jesus was not speaking to a STATEMENT
do you speak to statements when face to face with a person?
do say to someone, "Statement made by Joe, I accept you and make you the rock upon which I will..."
yeh, right...
but again, Jesus spoke not Greek but Hebrew and Aramaic
+
HisServant
New member
Even if you reduce it to the Hebrew and Aramaic words that were translated to Greek... the RCC position falls apart. They got away with hijacking "The Way' back then because most people were uneducated.
I was always fascinated with the RCC untenable reliance on Latin for so man centuries... the language of Jesus' mortal enemy.
republicanchick
New member
u make a big deal out of language..
what about the historical fact that the RCC was the ONLY Christian Church in the world until the 1600s
_
HisServant
New member
No, the Eastern Orthodox Churches and their patriarchs predated the RCC by centuries. And they never submitted to Romes 'authority'.
It was Rome that initiated the great schism because it coveted absolute power and divorced its brethren in 1054 in what was essentially a coup d'tat.
If history was the sole motivator for me joining a church... one of the Eastern Orthodox Churches would win hands down... and they are still here!
Cedarbay
New member
No.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
What is it considered to be?
The New Testament, was written in Greek. This seems strange, since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However, Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot!
So, around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely accepted and was even used in many synagogues.
It also became a wonderful missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read God's Word in their own tongue.
So The mainstream consensus is that the New Testament was written in a form of Koine Greek, which was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean from the Conquests of Alexander the Great (335–323 BC) until the evolution of Byzantine Greek (c. 600).
THE PROBLEM WITH PURGATORY
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1030, "All who die in Gods grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven."
So According to Roman Catholic Doctrine, though a person may be in a state of grace, he may not enter Heaven until he is purified from sins that were not dealt with on earth.
As a Christian who bases spiritual truth on the Bible alone, I see problems with the doctrine of purgatory. For example:
1. It is not explicitly found in the Bible.
2. It implies that the righteousness of Christ does not cleanse from all sin.
3. It implies that justification is not by faith alone.
4. It implies that there is something we must do in order to be cleansed of sin.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1030, "All who die in Gods grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven."
So According to Roman Catholic Doctrine, though a person may be in a state of grace, he may not enter Heaven until he is purified from sins that were not dealt with on earth.
As a Christian who bases spiritual truth on the Bible alone, I see problems with the doctrine of purgatory. For example:
1. It is not explicitly found in the Bible.
2. It implies that the righteousness of Christ does not cleanse from all sin.
3. It implies that justification is not by faith alone.
4. It implies that there is something we must do in order to be cleansed of sin.
Cruciform
New member
Congratulations. The very same website to which you're appealing also designates you as a NON-CHRISTIAN. Brilliant.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+
Cruciform
New member
Your affirmation, then, of the Catholic Church and her teachings is noted. :up:
I note that once again you ignore most a persons response and dishonestly represent their position to be something they never said. Are you proud of this tactic?
Cruciform
New member
I've misrepresented nothing, since serpent's basic claim was that he is "not anti-Catholic." Also, if I were you, I wouldn't bother trying to charge someone else with misrepresentation when you yourself can't manage to post a single statement about Catholic belief and teaching which is accurate. Better tend to that beam in your eye, friend.
Gaudium de veritate,
Cruciform
+T+