Explain This - Non Catholics?

[qui_est_ce]

OK. And this has what, exactly, to do with paying someone’s way out of Purgatory?

I was answering your question about indulgences

Nothing. However, bowing to statues and praying to them is strictly forbidden.

We don’t bow down and pray to statues

And you believe this refers to the pope…how, exactly?

Peter was the first Pope, God gave him the authority by handing him the keys.

And how do you come to this “proper understanding”?

The CC says so, and she has the authority (see Pope Peter I above]

Then why does Roman Catholicism teach so many things that are in error?

No Catholic Teaching is in error.

This is a very common Roman Catholic tactic. Would you care to go back and try quoting this verse in the correct context?

Tell me your opinio of the correct context

Unfortunately, this is referring to degrees of reward in Heaven, not to sending men to Purgatory to catch those last little sins that Jesus’ atonement missed.

I disagree with your interpretation

Colossians 1:24
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is*** lacking ***in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church.

We must participate in Christ’s suffering (do Penance for our sins) to complete in OUR lives the to fulfill our own salvation.

 

[qui_est_ce]

And therein lies the problem. Are we to base our doctrine on what somebody else believes? Or on the word of God?

BELIEF SYSTEM, not the same as an opinion.

 

[qui_est_ce]

And therein lies the problem. Are we to base our doctrine on what somebody else believes? Or on the word of God?

I’m still waiting for your explanation on =fhow the Bible came into physical being. Who decided what was Divinely inspired?

 

[AgnosTheist]

It shows that Catholic Christians believed in the Real Presence since at least the 8th century. We have believed it since the beginning
Acts 2:42
They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers

when did christians stop breaking the bread and started mass producing the round wafer?

 

[brosam]

I was answering your question about indulgences

Except that the passage you quoted has nothing to do with indulgences.

We don’t bow down and pray to statues

I’ll have to remember that next time I have to step over prostrate Roman Catholics at St. Patricks.

Peter was the first Pope, God gave him the authority by handing him the keys.

That’s a pretty big detail to leave out of the Bible, don’t you think?

The CC says so, and she has the authority (see Pope Peter I above]

Where does the Bible say that the Roman Catholic church have that authority?

No Catholic Teaching is in error.

Actually, there are many Roman Catholic teachings that are in error.

Purgatory is error.

Praying to the dead is error.

The sinlessness of Mary is error.

Each of the things I listed above are errors.

Tell me your opinio of the correct context

The passage starts several verses earlier and when the passage is taken as a whole, and not just one verse isolated, it tells us that the “rock” is Peter’s confession, not Peter.

I disagree with your interpretation

You’re welcome to disagree, but that’s still what the passage is referring to.

We must participate in Christ’s suffering (do Penance for our sins) to complete in OUR lives the to fulfill our own salvation.

And where is this in the Bible?

BELIEF SYSTEM, not the same as an opinion.

Again, are we to base our doctrine on someone else’s “belief system”? Or on God’s word?

Let’s just cut to the chase. No matter what I say, you’re going to insist that it was Roman Catholicism so let’s just save some time and, for the sake of argument, say that it’s the Roman Catholic church. How does the fact that the Roman Catholic church gave us the Bible negate the teachings of the Bible?

 

[dosdog]

Contents God, One and True God’s nature, Trinity, and Jesus
God’s Creatures Mary, Man, Angels, Saints, and the devil
God’s Remedies Grace, The Church, Scripture, and Sacraments
God’s Gifts Faith, Hope, Love, and Prayer
The Last Things Death, Purgatory, Heaven, and Hell
Additional Topics Apologetics, and topics of dispute with other Christians
Links Great Catholic links
infpage.com/concordance/

It is a foundation of our faith to believe that God gave Moses an oral explanation of the Torah along with the written text. This oral tradition is now essentially preserved in the Talmud and Midrashim. Just as we depend on tradition for the accepted text, vocalization, and translation of the Torah, so must we depend on tradition for its interpretation. The Written Torah cannot be understood without the oral tradition. Hence, if anything, the Oral Torah is the more important of the two. Since the Written Torah appears largely defective unless supplemented by the oral tradition, a denial of the Oral Torah necessarily leads to the denial of the divine origin of the written text as well…

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul clearly commands us in this verse to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.

2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity was determined from tradition). Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the Church had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors. Hence, the Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church. This also proves that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle. Other examples of apostolic tradition include the teachings on the Blessed Trinity, the hypostatic union (Jesus had a divine and human nature in one person), the filioque (that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son), the assumption of Mary, and knowing that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew.
scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html
aish.com/literacy/concepts/The_Oral_Tradition.asp

The Reformation Attack on the Bible. The deuterocanonicals teach Catholic doctrine, and for this reason they were taken out of the Old Testament by Martin Luther and placed in an appendix without page numbers. Luther also took out four New Testament books—Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation—and put them in an appendix without page numbers as well. These were later put back into the New Testament by other Protestants, but the seven books of the Old Testament were left out. Following Luther they had been left in an appendix to the Old Testament, and eventually the appendix itself was dropped (in 1827 by the British and Foreign Bible Society), To justify this rejection of books that had been in the Bible since before the days of the apostles (for the Septuagint was written before the apostles),

Jesus and Paul quote from the Septuagint
scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html
ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DEUTEROS.HTM

The History of the Textus Receptus

Erasmus made his own Greek translation from the Latin. He admitted to what he had done, but the result was a Greek text containing readings not found in any Greek manuscript – but which were faithfully retained through centuries of editions of the Textus Receptus. This included even certain readings which were not even correct Greek (Scrivener offers as an example Rev. 17:4 AKAQARTHTOS).

Thus it will be conceded by all reputable scholars – even those who favour the Byzantine text – that the Textus Receptus, in all its various forms, has no textual authority whatsoever. Were it not for the fact that it has been in use for so long as a basis for collations, it could be mercifully forgotten. What a tragedy, then, that it was the Bible of Protestant Christendom for close to four centuries!

skypoint.com/~waltzmn/TR.html
bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm

 

[qui_est_ce]

when did christians stop breaking the bread and started mass producing the round wafer?

Hi Agnus (you don’t mind me calling that, do you)?
Actually, little old nuns make the HOSTs by hand, really.

Hey, you’re not supposed to be here. Tell Brosam that everything I said can be verified by the Bible, but that the Bible is not objectively verifiable.

Being told that by an Agnostic holds more credibility to Sola Scriptura followers.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I’ll have to remember that next time I have to step over prostrate Roman Catholics at St. Patricks.

You would step inside a church run by the Whore of Babylon?:bigyikes:

Where does the Bible say that the Roman Catholic church have that authority?

I already answered that in the keys references, but you chose to interpret it differently than Catholics have since the birth of the Church on Pentecost.
Since you insist that Truth can only be found in the Bible, please tell me where it says that in the Bible.

Actually, there are many Roman Catholic teachings that are in error.

wrong

Purgatory is error.

wrong

Praying to the dead is error.

wrong

The sinlessness of Mary is error.

That’s a new one. I’ll have to check it out.

Do you believe Christmas is on 12/25?

The passage starts several verses earlier and when the passage is taken as a whole, and not just one verse isolated, it tells us that the “rock” is Peter’s confession, not Peter.

You mean Matt 16:18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

I don’t see any confession written here.
Your interpretation is pretty twisted, and you go against 2,000 years of the Church saying Peter is the Rock.

You’re welcome to disagree, but that’s still what the passage is referring to.

It is not I who disagree, what you are saying is unbiblical. I will take the Bible over your opinions.

Again, are we to base our doctrine on someone else’s “belief system”? Or on God’s word?

God’s word, of course

Let’s just cut to the chase. No matter what I say, you’re going to insist that it was Roman Catholicism so let’s just save some time and, for the sake of argument, say that it’s the Roman Catholic church. How does the fact that the Roman Catholic church gave us the Bible negate the teachings of the Bible?

Got me. Why would the Catholic Church give us the Bible and then not follow it? BTW, it was not the Roman Catholic Church that gave us the Bible, it was the Catholic Church.

Why do you keep saying Roman Catholic?

 

[qui_est_ce]

The Reformation Attack on the Bible. The deuterocanonicals teach Catholic doctrine, and for this reason they were taken out of the Old Testament by Martin Luther and placed in an appendix without page numbers. Luther also took out four New Testament books—Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation—and put them in an appendix without page numbers as well. These were later put back into the New Testament by other Protestants, but the seven books of the Old Testament were left out. Following Luther they had been left in an appendix to the Old Testament, and eventually the appendix itself was dropped (in 1827 by the British and Foreign Bible Society), To justify this rejection of books that had been in the Bible since before the days of the apostles (for the Septuagint was written before the apostles),

You rock!

 

[brosam]

…