Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

There are 589734 comments on the CBC News story from Jul 10, 2007, titled Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican. In it, CBC News reports that:

The VaticanA issued a document Tuesday restatingA its belief that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church of Jesus Christ.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBC News.

Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#361705 May 31, 2012
Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Luke 2:48-51
48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him,“Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.”
49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked.“Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?”
50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.
51 Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them.~~~~~But his mother treasured all these things in her heart.~~~~~
Mary was the "only" person who really knew the identity of
Jesus; that she let her Son die on the cross is evidence that He was truly the Son of God!
John 2:5
5 His mother said to the servants,“Do whatever he tells you.”
YOu said:

Mary was the "ONLY" person who really knew the identity of Jesus.

...So does that mean the nativity scene is not true? Remember the story we were all taught 3 Kings riding camels who followed the light in the sky bringing gifts of Gold, Myr, and Franchesnese, to the "NEW BORN SAVIOR"! Mary wasn't the only one who knew. 3 Kings or Kings maybe there were 20 kings.

What about King Herod and his henchmen? If you believe the story that King Herod tried to kill baby Jesus than King Herod also knew. How did King Herod know unless someone told him? Right?..... Mary wasn't the only one who knew.

If we are to believe that Jesus was free of sin his entire life than Jesus himself would have known he was the son of God, yet no where during his 33 years, does he claim such a title.

what say you!
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#361706 May 31, 2012
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
I challenge anyone to PROVE evolution with facts.
I would Prove it to you in a second but being as uneducated as you are in the science's, it would be like trying to explain it to a three year old.

Why not get off your fat lazy ass and make a trip to the LIBRARY, it is there you will find piles of books with MOUNTAINS of evidence for the FACT of evolution. The proof is there for anyone with a grammar school education to read, you are either to lazy or to stupid to see it.

Next, take a trip to a science museum, or museum of natural history, you; along with throngs of school children can see the FACTS of evolution right before your eyes.

Don't be a lazy ass and expect someone to do your investigation for you, friggin EDUCATE yourself. Willful ignorance is one of the worst traits a human can have. NOW get busy!!!!!!!

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#361707 May 31, 2012
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Boston is fine, a really great city. I love being close to the ocean. Thanks for asking!!!!
I love Boston also.Been there many many times.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#361708 May 31, 2012
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
<snipper for space>
No, AnthonyMN, you are way, way off base. Way off!!!
As I said, sometimes He spoke in metaphors and other times literally.

If I'm "way, way off base", then so was St. Paul and the unanimous testimony of all who were taught by the apostles.
Read and learn....

John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven.
John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread which must be consumed.

John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat?

John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact, Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically.

John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word "phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus does what?

John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch. He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?”(John 6:52).

John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not "soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh. It is always literal.

John 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food and "real" drink use the word "alethes." "Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink.

John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque.

John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.

cont.
Clay

United States

#361709 May 31, 2012
Oxbow wrote:
Answer the question....
Catholics teach: Jesus Christ the Incarnate Son of God....you don't follow your religion's teaching?????
<quoted text>
So...you don't follow the Catholic teaching that Christ is the Incarnate Son of God...You are either not a Catholic or just say you are...
Enough with the word play. Everyone, including your fellow Protestants have explained it properly to you.
If you're a Baptist, ask your preacher.
Whatever you do, don't make up your own Christianity.
Did we just witness the beginning of the latest Protestant religion the "Oxboro Southern Baptist"?

Stay tuned
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#361710 May 31, 2012
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
"Jesus said to his desciples. I will return before the end of this generation..........still waiting!!"
It is typical of scoffers to use the English definitions for Greek words!!!!
English definition of generation: The average interval of time between the birth of parents and the birth of their offspring.
Greek definition of the Greek word from which generation was translated. genea: a generation; by implication, an age (the period or the persons):--age, generation, nation, time.
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
With the proper definition applied it reads:Verily I say unto you, This nation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
twist and scrape the definition anyway you want to make your story fit...(lol)

Till all things be fullfilled you say....... WHAT THINGS?

Jesus said to the thief on the cross "by the end of "THIS DAY" meaning crucifixion day, you will be with me in paradise".

Scriptures claim when Jesus died, he was layed in his tomb for "3" days, he didn't go anywhere with this thief on the cross. Thats 3 days after he said to the thief at the end of this day I will be with you today. Obiviously that never happened........right?......ri ght!

a lot of contradictions in the bible!
Truth

Leesburg, VA

#361711 May 31, 2012
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
Mary was the "only" person who really knew the identity of Jesus..........you say.
Wasn't Joseph informed before the birth? Didn't Jesus even know himself that he was the son of God for 33 years on earth.
If Jesus was performing miracles as ONLY the new testament claims who was he suppose to be if he didn't know himself who he really was? What was the purpose for him performing miracles, and what did the people miraclized think was happening to them and by whom? Wasn't the reason for performing miracles to show people he was special? Son of God! Yet outside the BIBLE, nothing is written in our history about any miracle worker or miracles performed..........
Acts 2:22

22 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.

It was the miracles that showed that God approved of what Jesus said and did.

John 5:36

36 “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing —testify that the Father has sent me.

His "works" proved that He was Who He said He was.

John 14:11

11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves.

Isaiah 35:5-6

5 Then will the eyes of the blind be opened
and the ears of the deaf unstopped.

6 Then will the lame leap like a deer,
and the mute tongue shout for joy.
Water will gush forth in the wilderness
and streams in the desert.

OT prophecies predicted that the Messiah would work miracles.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#361712 May 31, 2012
cont. to oldjg

John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh."

John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us.

John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly.

Mark 4:34 - Jesus always explained to His disciples the real meanings of His teachings. He never would have let them go away with a false impression, most especially in regard to a question about eternal salvation.

John 6:37 - Jesus says He would not drive those away from Him. They understood Him correctly but would not believe.

John 3:5,11; Matt. 16:11-12 - here are some examples of Jesus correcting wrong impressions of His teaching. In the Eucharistic discourse, Jesus does not correct the scandalized disciples.

John 6:64,70 - Jesus ties the disbelief in the Real Presence of His Body and Blood in the Eucharist to Judas' betrayal. Those who don't believe in this miracle betray Him.

Psalm 27:2; Isa. 9:20; 49:26; Mic. 3:3; 2 Sam. 23:17; Rev. 16:6; 17:6, 16 - to further dispense with the Protestant claim that Jesus was only speaking symbolically, these verses demonstrate that symbolically eating body and blood is always used in a negative context of a physical assault. It always means “destroying an enemy,” not becoming intimately close with him. Thus, if Jesus were speaking symbolically in John 6:51-58, He would be saying to us, "He who reviles or assaults me has eternal life." This, of course, is absurd.

John 10:7 - Protestants point out that Jesus did speak metaphorically about Himself in other places in Scripture. For example, here Jesus says, "I am the door." But in this case, no one asked Jesus if He was literally made of wood. They understood him metaphorically.

John 15:1,5 - here is another example, where Jesus says, "I am the vine." Again, no one asked Jesus if He was literally a vine. In John 6, Jesus' disciples did ask about His literal speech (that this bread was His flesh which must be eaten). He confirmed that His flesh and blood were food and drink indeed. Many disciples understood Him and left Him.

Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18 – Jesus says He will not drink of the “fruit of the vine” until He drinks it new in the kingdom. Some Protestants try to use this verse (because Jesus said “fruit of the vine”) to prove the wine cannot be His blood. But the Greek word for fruit is “genneema” which literally means “that which is generated from the vine.” In John 15:1,5 Jesus says “I am the vine.” So “fruit of the vine” can also mean Jesus’ blood. In 1 Cor. 11:26-27, Paul also used “bread” and “the body of the Lord” interchangeably in the same sentence. Also, see Matt. 3:7;12:34;23:33 for examples were “genneema” means “birth” or “generation.”

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharis...
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#361713 May 31, 2012


Why was Jesus performing miracles if he didn't know he was someone special? Why did the 12 apostles during the crucifixion lock themselves away in fear, because they didn't know he was the son of God, not until the resurrection did they change their minds..........as the story goes. doesn't make sense!

I have always maintained that many pieces of the life of Jesus story, were added and pieced together later when the catholic fathers had to figure out how this story would play out from birth till death, and cover all the bases.

hojo

Saint Paul, MN

#361714 May 31, 2012
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep stating you have the TRUTH!
Tell me this.
If Mary conceived messiah Jesus, why is there not ONE story in the scriptures by Mary or Jesus brothers or other relatives that conveys that Jesus himself is the son of God? If a virginal conception took place shouldn't Mary know about it? She says nothing.
Mark 3:21,31 Jesus relatives, brothers come to seize Jesus, including Mary who joins them, for they claim he is crazy. Did Mary not inform her nuclear family that contrary to what they think Jesus IS NOT crazy because he is the son of God? She says nothing!
something is wrong HOJO......what say you?
Michael--I have no intention of getting into some theological or biblical debate, discussion or argument with you (or anyone else for that matter) because it is a "total waste of time" dealing with anti-catholic protestants, agnostics or atheists, in which their own beliefs are "grounded" in their 40,000+ "personal opinionated" heresies of conflicting and contradicting distortions, lies and deceit, in denial of the TRUTH.---- Over 2000 years of the TRUTH of TRUE Sacred Church History and the TRUTH of TRUE bible interpretation from the Early Church Fathers in 397AD have CONFIRMED THE TRUTH!----- HOWEVER,--- I will respond to you, from the Gospels, when Jesus HIMSELF declared------ HIMSELF,---as the Son of God, when He was taken before the Sanhedren.----At that time it was Caiaphas who asked Him directly, "Are you the Son of God" and Jesus answered, "I am"!----And that only RE-CONFIRMS everything that we ALREADY new about Jesus (thoughout the New Testament) especially from the Gospels and from over 2000 years from HIS One True Apostolic Catholic Church, that He gave us in Matt 16:13-21--The point is Michael----I don't need Jesus Christ to emerge out of a "cloud", making HIMSELF visible on the nearest "freeway overpass" to believe in Him.-----Sounds like you do!!!
Clay

United States

#361715 May 31, 2012
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
maybe its because none of this really happened.
I have stated before. During the supposed life of Jesus 33 years! the son of God, not anyone including his immediate family show any indication that Jesus is the son of God. NT records stories of Mary and his brothers or cousins but nothing ever indicated by any of them that he is the son of God. Nothing written by the 12 apostles who were supposedly his best and closet friends, yet they seem to know nothing.
During this era we know there were dozens of Jewish and Roman scribes, writers and philosophers that recorded events that happen in and throughout Jerusulem, yet NOT ONE of them ever recorded a story about a miracle birth, or ANY of the players including Mary/Joseph, 12 apostles, or even the crucifixion and the resurrection.
Please read this website.........and respond back to me.
http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/jesus5.htm
Since you're the research king, find out how many people around the time of Christ could read and write. How many pens and paper were available for Mary and Joseph to jot everything down about their lives!!
Serious.
750,000,000 people living today can not read and write. Imagine what the statistics were back then?

Its obvious why Christ established a Church and not a book.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#361716 May 31, 2012
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.
Only be sure that thou eat not the blood: for the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.
----------
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
----------
When all verses are taken in the literal sense, as Catholics do, you have contradiction in the Bible.
The SBC teaches the first set of verses are in the literal sense, and the second set of verses are in the metaphoric sense...hence no contradiction.....
John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque.

John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.

John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh."

John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#361717 May 31, 2012
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
What kind of "power"? Over one's mind? "Power" to cause someone to behave a certain way? "Power" to heal physically? "Power" to heal spiritually?
All of these supposed "powers" can all be classified as Self.
If not any of the above, then what kind of "power" are you trying to express that this ritual actually produces?
IMO, you are just pumping up something you know nothing about.
New Age, I know that you will be looking for some kind of
rational proof,empirical validation. Nonetheless, I will also testify to the power of the Eucharist.It is impossible to prove this scientifically. Yet it is real and of substance.
You deny the existence of a spiritual reality with its own reality, its own laws, its own vocabulary.You will not cross this line. That is your choice.
Idi O Syncrasy

Farmington, CA

#361718 May 31, 2012
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
If you were taught and believe that Jesus was born the son of God, why is it that NOT once does Mary ever conceive this information to anyone including her family.
For 33 years Jesus was known as the son of God, yet most followers during the life of Jesus knew nothing of this miraculous virgin conception and ONLY claim he is the son of God ONLY!, AFTER the ressurection 33 years later.
Wouldn't common sense indicate that Mary would have informed her immediate family and friends that during Jesus life he was the son of God It seems even Mary doesn't know this because she never once conveys it in any writings by or about her that her son was born through immaculate conception.

.....again, makes no common sense.
What makes no sense Michael, is you.

You claim ot have been a Catholic and attended parochial school, yet you know nothing of the details of how a parochial school functions.
You claim to have been forced to undergo religion classes at a Catholic school, yet you have no knowledge of Christian teaching.
Mehinks you are exposing yourself as a malicious poseur, a fraud.

From the very first of the gospels Mary is disccussing her pregnancy with The Lord Jesus, with her husband, cousin and other close people.

It is approriate to highlite this parcticular reading today,
The Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary

"Luke 1:39-56

Mary set out
and traveled to the hill country in haste
to a town of Judah,
where she entered the house of Zechariah
and greeted Elizabeth.

When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting,
the infant leaped in her womb,
and Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit,
cried out in a loud voice and said,
"Most blessed are you among women,
and blessed is the fruit of your womb.
And how does this happen to me,
that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
For at the moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears,
the infant in my womb leaped for joy.
Blessed are you who believed
that what was spoken to you by the Lord
would be fulfilled."

And Mary said:
"My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord;
my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
for he has looked with favor on his lowly servant.
From this day all generations will call me blessed:
the Almighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his Name.

He has mercy on those who fear him
in every generation.
He has shown the strength of his arm,
he has scattered the proud in their conceit.
He has cast down the mighty from their thrones,
and has lifted up the lowly.
He has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent away empty.
He has come to the help of his servant Israel
for he has remembered his promise of mercy,
the promise he made to our fathers,
to Abraham and his children for ever."

Mary remained with her about three months
and then returned to her home."

That Mary and her cousin are discussing her being blessed as The Mother of God, Jesus, would be clear to most rational people.
You are sure to have trouble with it.
blacklagoon

Boston, MA

#361719 May 31, 2012
Hermeneutics Smutics wrote:
<quoted text>dont waste your time educating us ignorant Christians.(LOL not angry at that)For real,open your mind to some theology. Some excellent theologians and philosophers.Most of your questions will be abswered. If you are open minded, then you are open minded about everything, not just science. Science works well when used for the purpose it was designed. It is useless in philosophy and theology. These are also the areas of some very bright people.
The term 'Ignorant" is really not met to be insulting. I am ignorant to a lot of things. I'm ignorant about Genetics, and advanced mathematics, and physics, and medicine, and Neurosugery----the list is long. I do try and learn some basic information about all sciences, I think it's very important in making decisions in my life, and generally knowing as much as I can about this wonderful universe we live in. When people challenge me to produce evidence that evolution is the origin of life, they show ignorance about the subject. Evolution says NOTHING abbot the origin of life.

I have a huge problem with the study of Theology, and then trying to somehow relate Philosophy to Theology. Possibly you can help me out here. First, by definition, Theology is---"The study of the nature of God and religious beliefs." Simple question, how does someone study something that is either non-existent, or from a realm that can't possibly be explored? Before you can STUDY anything, you must know it properties, it's attributes, how it manifests itself in reality. I have never heard anyone be able to clearly define exactly what Gods properties are. So how does one study this mythical being?

Philosophy is by definition,,,,,"The study of the fundamental nature of KNOWLEDGE, REALITY, and EXISTENCE. Knowledge, reality, existence, non of these can possible apply to God, so there is my problem trying to tie Philosophy to Theology.

I do in fact, have a very open mind. Show me that something exists and I'm open to any possibilities.

Don't you think that evidence is the single most important thing in determining whether something is real or not?
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#361720 May 31, 2012
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
Religious doctrines or beliefs are not "logical".
NASL says "Religious doctrines or beliefs are not logical"

AGREED!

EXAMPLE!

All christians were taught that Mary and Joseph were devout Jews. We all know that devout Jews do not believe in the trinity or that Jesus was the son of God.

Scriptures claim Mary was notified that she would be impregnated by the holy spirit of the TRINITY. Mary as a devout Jew doesn't believe in the Trinity.

Mary a devout JEW gives birth to son of God Jesus. But JEWS do not believe that Jesus is son of God, so why would Mary believe she is giving birth to the messiah if her belief forbids her to have that belief.

Mary prays in the jewish temple for the next 33 years as a devout Jew.

How could Mary practice her faith as a Jew when Jews do not believe in the HOLY SPIRIT and that Jesus the son of God.........as Jews are still waiting for the messiah, and Mary was a Jew.

This whole Jesus story, Mary and Joseph, make no RELIGIOUS SENSE AT ALL.

Maybe that is why JEWS who still do not believe in the TRINITY believe Mary and Joseph were the actual parents of commoner Jesus.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#361721 May 31, 2012
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
What say you Anthony?
also........If Mary and Joseph were devout Jews and we know Jews do not believe in the trinity and Jews do not believe Jesus as the son of God, then how could Mary/Joseph stay DEVOUT Jews for the next 33 years as the NT claims if the Holy Spirit (trinity) and Jesus son of God are not believed by JEWS?
awaiting your reply...
Jesus Himself followed the Jewish laws to the end with a couple exceptions. He was a devout Jew.
Anthony MN

Andover, MN

#361722 May 31, 2012
Oxbow wrote:
<quoted text>
Because He was talking metaphorically...to read what He said in the literal sense, as Catholics do, that labels them as cannibals. Quote: cannibal: A person who eats the flesh of other humans.
We are not cannibals...
You and your SBC teachers do not have supernatural faith. You are "unspiritual" and are "still in the flesh".

BTW, have you called any Catholic lady a "peter eater" lately? Is your vulgar alter ego skulking around on another forum?
Clay

United States

#361723 May 31, 2012
how come confrinting hasn't posted today?

I hope he wasn't that Pentecostal minister that died from the snake bite in West Virginia the other day.
Idi O Syncrasy

Farmington, CA

#361724 May 31, 2012
OldJG wrote:
<quoted text>
YOUR QUOTE, "Purgatory is in the Bible and always taught but later defined officially. 2Maccabees 12:43-45 1 cor 3:15" END QUOTE.
2 Maccabees is not in my Bible. Where did you find this book?
..........
The second Book of Maccabees isn't in your Bible?
Sounds like you got ripped off by whoever sold you that Bible, OldJug.

They sold you one of those abridged, edited, shortened and incomplete bibles that has had original canon removed by men with evil intent.
All good and complete Bibles contain both first and second Maccabees and to teach and educate us with divine information regarding purgatory.

You should go back to that book store and demand your money back for that defective, imitation Bible.
You're gonna get real confused about what God's teaching of you don't have the real deal.

Heck! Getting the wrong directions could lead you into the pitfalls of protestantism.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min It aint necessari... 837,795
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 15 min dollarsbill 4,227
gay bottom in gurgaon (May '14) 17 min Havi 90
Should Black People in the USA Leave America an... (May '13) 21 min SiddiqAhmed 693
No one should blaspheme Prophet Mohammad, peace... 51 min Tony17 446
Tamil vs Kannada. Which one is the oldest langu... (Oct '12) 59 min Naveen kumar 1,439
ER $luts 1 hr Trouble maker 1
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 hr Rosa_Winkel 612,163
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 4 hr set free in truth 176,854
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 hr RADEKT 271,297
More from around the web