Is the Catholic Church a cult ?

[TriuneUnity]

Of course the invisible Church will never be in doctrinal unity-thats becuase it never existed.

So you know from outward appearance who is and is not Christian? Tell us, at what age did your psychic abilities develop?

Ignorance of Catholocism dulty noted.

Ah yes…“If you dont agree with the teachings of Rome you obviously dont know anything about it.”

 

[estesbob]

Good. We can at least agree on euphemisms!

There is only one Church; all believers who trust in Christ as the atonement for their sins, and believe he was raised for their justification.

It does boil down to a question of authority; I accept the authority of the God-breathed Scriptures over and against those who teach in opposition to it. Whether it be Rome or another sect.

No; they were excommunicated from Rome for stating that her doctrines were unbiblical and against that which Christ instituted and that which the apostles taught.

And quickly broke into thousands of sects all claiming everyone elses doctrines were unbiblical and aganist that which Christ instituted and that which the Apostles had taught. Oh-and as a side benefit Henry got to marry his mistress. and Luther a nun.

 

[ljahns]

Its answer is to be found in the use of the two words “petros” and Petra". He is saying that Peter you are a pebble and on this rock, (the statement that Petrer made) I will build my church. Again then the use of the term church translated from the two words Kurious (The Lords People or those who belong to the Lord) and Ekklesia (Those called out) It is where we get our word “church” from. It is a body of believers. There are those who also believe that it refers specifically to the assembly when all are together but most do not see that conclusion as nothing really lends itself to that inclusion. Generally it is a calling out from the world to be His.

That interpretation just is not correct on several levels. Let’s break this down.

Mt 16:13 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”

Caesarea Philippi was originally called Paneas because it was the center of worship to the Greek pagan god Pan (known as the god of fear). The mount itself is over 100 feet straight up and 500 feet across where King Philip built the city Caesarea Philippi dedicated to Caesar and obviously himself. Now at the foot of the mount are caves and niches (which contained statues of pan). One cave in particular was full of water of such an unfathomable depth that the worshipers of pan referred to it as the gates of hell or netherworld. So this is the setting upon which we enter the story.

Mt 16:14-18 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.” Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you (singular because he is talking directly to Peter), you are Peter (Petros in Greek) and upon this rock (petra in Greek) I will build my Church and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

This is where we get into linguistics. You have to remember that petros is male in connotation and petra is female in connotation. So the Greek writers would never have given Peter a name that had a female connotation. It would be derogatory to do so; like calling someone a prick is today. Also Jesus would most likely not have been speaking in Greek but Aramaic. There is only one word for rock in Aramaic and that is Kepa. So Jesus would have said “And so I say to you, you are Kepa and upon this Kepa I will build my Church. Now Church in Greek is ekklesia and it occurs in the gospels only here and in 18:17 twice and in 18:17 it speaks of the authority of the Church. Jesus Church means the community he will gather and that like a building Peter will be its solid foundation. Also in the earliest Christian writings Peter is referred to as Kepa so the understanding that Peter is Rock has been generally understood for 2000 years. Or I should say until the reformation when they had to find some way to refute Rome’s primacy. And now we go directly to Mt 19 where the keys are given. Remember we are still in the same scene. Jesus is still talking directly to Peter or Kepa.

Mt 19 “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Giving the keys is a very HUGE responsibility. If you look in the OT any time the keys of the kingdom are given to a person it entails being responsible for the kingdom in the absence of its ruler. So who is Jesus giving the keys to? These passages read as the one scene it is show clearly that Jesus is talking directly to Peter and no one else. He is handing Peter the keys in preparation for His absence.

So imagine you are standing at this huge mount with what is purportedly the gates of the netherworld and also remember that in Israel all churches were built on mounts and this one is the biggest mount around. Even higher than the temple mount in Jerusalem. The symbolism seems remarkably clear to me.

(Paraphrased) Jesus says Simon you are rock and upon this rock I will build my Church and all the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. What you bind will be bound, what you loose will be loosed.

Here you have the highest mount which symbolizes the greatness of Gods Church, the pit of pan (as I like to call it) that will not prevail against it and Peter with the keys to it all.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Simply not true-whether one uses the Aramaic Mathew was writtne in or the Greek it was translated into.

catholic.com/library/Peter_the_Rock.asp

sorry true

 

[backfrmthebrink]

That interpretation just is not correct on several levels. Let’s break this down.

Mt 16:13 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”

Caesarea Philippi was originally called Paneas because it was the center of worship to the Greek pagan god Pan (known as the god of fear). The mount itself is over 100 feet straight up and 500 feet across where King Philip built the city Caesarea Philippi dedicated to Caesar and obviously himself. Now at the foot of the mount are caves and niches (which contained statues of pan). One cave in particular was full of water of such an unfathomable depth that the worshipers of pan referred to it as the gates of hell or netherworld. So this is the setting upon which we enter the story.

Mt 16:14-18 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.” Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you (singular because he is talking directly to Peter), you are Peter (Petros in Greek) and upon this rock (petra in Greek) I will build my Church and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

This is where we get into linguistics. You have to remember that petros is male in connotation and petra is female in connotation. So the Greek writers would never have given Peter a name that had a female connotation. It would be derogatory to do so; like calling someone a prick is today. Also Jesus would most likely not have been speaking in Greek but Aramaic. There is only one word for rock in Aramaic and that is Kepa. So Jesus would have said “And so I say to you, you are Kepa and upon this Kepa I will build my Church. Now Church in Greek is ekklesia and it occurs in the gospels only here and in 18:17 twice and in 18:17 it speaks of the authority of the Church. Jesus Church means the community he will gather and that like a building Peter will be its solid foundation. Also in the earliest Christian writings Peter is referred to as Kepa so the understanding that Peter is Rock has been generally understood for 2000 years. Or I should say until the reformation when they had to find some way to refute Rome’s primacy. And now we go directly to Mt 19 where the keys are given. Remember we are still in the same scene. Jesus is still talking directly to Peter or Kepa.

Mt 19 “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Giving the keys is a very HUGE responsibility. If you look in the OT any time the keys of the kingdom are given to a person it entails being responsible for the kingdom in the absence of its ruler. So who is Jesus giving the keys to? These passages read as the one scene it is show clearly that Jesus is talking directly to Peter and no one else. He is handing Peter the keys in preparation for His absence.

So imagine you are standing at this huge mount with what is purportedly the gates of the netherworld and also remember that in Israel all churches were built on mounts and this one is the biggest mount around. Even higher than the temple mount in Jerusalem. The symbolism seems remarkably clear to me.

(Paraphrased) Jesus says Simon you are rock and upon this rock I will build my Church and all the gates of the netherworld will not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. What you bind will be bound, what you loose will be loosed.

Here you have the highest mount which symbolizes the greatness of Gods Church, the pit of pan (as I like to call it) that will not prevail against it and Peter with the keys to it all.

As much as I like your response. I have to study that a bit more. From the start I see interpretation/translation challenges that you have resolved differently than anyone I have studied and myself included. This though is the meat that I love.

 

[bartimaeus]

Hi:

If any of you are interested in learning more about cults, you might find the following links and conference helpful:

catholicxjw.com/Agenda.html

catholicxjw.com/whconference.html

Jeff S.

www.catholicxjw.com

 

[bartimaeus]

bartimaeus:
OK, so, these 3 links lead us to:

The Fellowship of Catholic Ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses.

That only explains that it is possible to go from one cult to another

Amen.

 

[bartimaeus]

bartimaeus:
The battle is being waged for our souls today as it has been for the prior 6000 years: The old battle is between God’s truth and Satan’s lies. In these last days we are observing an ever increasing conflict between the spirit of truth and the spirit of error (1 John 4:6). We must never forget that the primary reason the Lord Jesus came into the world was to glorify His Father by bearing witness to the truth.
It is only through belief in the truth of God, as revealed in His Inspired Word, that sinners can be saved. Let us always give thanks to God because He has chosen us from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth (2 Thes. 2:13).

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Amen

 

[bartimaeus]

On the thirtieth anniversary of the Second Vatican Council, Pope John Paul II endorsed the new Catechism of the Catholic Church. It was given by his Apostolic authority, as a statement of the Catholic faith and doctrine, on October 11, 1992.

In his forward, John Paul II said, “I beseech the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, to support with her powerful intercession the catechetical work of the entire Church.”

The Catechism’s goal was to show “carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the Catholic faith.”

Does the Catholic faith have such harmony?

Or is it a complex religion with numerous contradictions that leave Catholics and non-Catholics alike in a constant state of confusion or disinterest?

I bring to you a look within the covers of the Catechism,to show why many Catholics don’t know what or whom to believe.
Here is a look at some key doctrines, with their contradictions and allow us to let God’s authoritative word settle the issue.

Paragraph numbers are in parenthesis.

Is God Still Speaking Through Men?

Statement - “God who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the spouse [the church] of His beloved Son” (79).
By way of Tradition, God’s word is transmitted “to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it by their
preaching” (81).
“Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single deposit of the Word of God” (97).

Contradiction - “God has said everything in His word. In (Christ) He has said everything; there will be no other word than this one. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending
Him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty” (65).

There will be “no new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ” (66).

“God has revealed Himself fully by sending His own Son. The Son is His Father’s definitive word; so there will be no further revelation
after Him” (73).

God’s Word -

“I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered
to the saints” (Jude 3).

**
God’s Word:**
“It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man.”

(Psalm 118:8)

Can Anyone Interpret Scripture?

Statement - “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God…has been entrusted to the living, teaching officeof the Church alone” (85).

Contradiction - “Christ, the eternal Word of the living God, must through the Holy Spirit, open our minds to understand scriptures”
(108).

**God’s Word **- “And as for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things” (1 John 2:27).

“Now we havereceived…the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things freely given to us by God” (1 Cor. 2:12).

Did Christ Finish the Work of Redemption?

Statement - In the Eucharist “the work of redemption is carried on” (1405).

Contradiction - "The redemption won by Christ consists in this, that He came “to give His life as a ransom for many” (622).

God’s Word - “He entered the holy place oncefor all, having obtained eternal redemption”

Praise God,

Tim

 

[inthecloud]

Back to the brink about this post I made several questions. I have found no answer from you.

Don’t sue me you invited me here so I cut it and pasted it. I do have experience working with cults.
Actually I did do my research on this particular cult I was working with and it was sometime ago. However to answer your leading question, Yes it is. I am sure that is going to raise a ton of responses but I will say for now I will not reply to any of them. The CC is complicated in that it is so accepted in our communitiesone of the largest business around. largest land owner and at one time the largest distillery.
The first rule in establishing a cult is to alter the Word of God the next to either discredit it or to make their writingsa equal to it as such allowing to add or change the message. Oncew that happens there is trremendous control and almost a complete inability to argue with reason. The area where it does not fit in type as you would usually find is that it does not prohibit its members of protein, essential for cognitive functioning. It will however establish a head and one that can claim exclusicve authority and therby power.

I know I am in trouble. but don’t worry you are in good company with Jehovah Witnesswes, Mormanism and Christian Science to name a few community accepted cults. Ok there. I can hear the guns clicking.

My guns are shooting. No answer yet on my questions.

About Tim, copying and pasting JCP book on the alleged contradiction in the Cathecism with the Bible using out of contect quotes deservers another tread.
On Sola Scriptura.
I want you both to prove me that the CC is a Cult and that you definition of a Cult is impartial and not made by fundamentalist themeselves according to their whims and prejudices.

 

[flyersfan1088]

Its answer is to be found in the use of the two words “petros” and Petra".

Wow, it’s been almost 20 years since I’ve seen this arguement! Let me tell you a secret. Jesus wasn’t speaking greek. He spoke Aramaic. Kepha, not petra or petros. Do a little bit of research before you post. It might give you at least half a leg to stand on.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Back to the brink about this post I made several questions. I have found no answer from you.

My guns are shooting. No answer yet on my questions.

About Tim, copying and pasting JCP book on the alleged contradiction in the Cathecism with the Bible using out of contect quotes deservers another tread.
On Sola Scriptura.
I want you both to prove me that the CC is a Cult and that you definition of a Cult is impartial and not made by fundamentalist themeselves according to their whims and prejudices.

I really don’t intend on trying to prove anything as its impossible to break this stronghold without Christ asa the breakingball. As for my definition, It is not a “fundamentalist” definition (btw you use that term as if it were bad) its not) It is my observation from my experience on how I witnessed cults getting control of its victims. as for the cc well you have to make up your own minds do you not?

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Wow, it’s been almost 20 years since I’ve seen this arguement! Let me tell you a secret. Jesus wasn’t speaking greek. He spoke Aramaic. Kepha, not petra or petros. Do a little bit of research before you post. It might give you at least half a leg to stand on.

spoke Aramaic recorded Greek.translated Latin

 

[elvisman]

There is only one Church; all believers who trust in Christ as the atonement for their sins, and believe he was raised for their justification.

Yes - it’s called the Catholic Church.

It does boil down to a question of authority; I accept the authority of the God-breathed Scriptures over and against those who teach in opposition to it. Whether it be Rome or another sect.

If you truly accept God-breathed Scripture - I suggest you re-read **Matt. 16:17-19, **Matt 18:15-18, John 20:21-23.

No; they were excommunicated from Rome for stating that her doctrines were unbiblical and against that which Christ instituted and that which the apostles taught.

They divorced themselves from the Church. They were teaching heretical doctrines such as Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. They were advocating the removal of several books from the bible. They couldn’t even agree with each other on key issues such as the Real Presence (Marburg, 1529). That’s why they were excommunicated.

 

[bartimaeus]

Back to the brink about this post I made several questions. I have found no answer from you.

My guns are shooting. No answer yet on my questions.

**About Tim, copying and pasting JCP book on the alleged contradiction in the Cathecism with the Bible using out of contect quotes deservers another tread. **
On Sola Scriptura.
I want you both to prove me that the CC is a Cult and that you definition of a Cult is impartial and not made by fundamentalist themeselves according to their whims and prejudices.

First off, the proof is in the pudding

My Dear Brother, can you expound upon “alleged contradiction?”?
Also, what is ‘JCP book?’

The words of the pope are here in black and white, straight from the RCC Catechism, but then, the darkness can never perceive the light.

The following is a cult, (defined incrementally.) I am not saying that the RCC fits all, but if it fits even one, in your spiritual walk, you need to take a hard look (!!)at what you are buying into.

**What is a cult? **
Generally, it is a group that is unorthodox, esoteric, and has a devotion to a person, object, or a set of new ideas.
New Teaching - has a new theology and doctrine.

Only True Teaching - often considers traditional religious systems to be apostate and it alone possess the complete truth.

Strong Leadership - often an individual or small but powerful leadership group holds control of the group’s teachings and practices.
Asset Acquirement - often requires tithing and/or property transfer to the religious system.

Isolationist - to facilitate control over the members physically, intellectually, financially, and emotionally.
Controlling - exercises control over the members. Sometimes this is through fear, threatening loss of salvation if you leave the group. Sometimes through indoctrination.

Indoctrination - possesses methods to reinforce the cult’s beliefs and standards where opposing views are ridiculed and often misrepresented.

Apocalyptic - to give the members a future focus and philosophical purpose in avoiding the apocalypse or being delivered through it.
Experience - various practices including meditation, repetition of words and/or phrases, and ‘spiritual’ enlightenment with God are used as confirmation of their truth.
Depravation - sleep and food deprivation which weakens the will of the subject.
This is uncommon, though practiced by more severe cults

Persecution - predictions of being persecuted and often combined with claiming any opposing views demonstrated against them as a form of persecution.

What I see here, smacks right in the face of the teachings of the RCC, But, then again, the RCC is way across the board on most issues, since it changes doctrines from generation to generation. -When, for instance was the assumption of Mary dogmatized, 1968, maybe?
How about Limbo? they teach one generation that they have the only truth, then teach the next generation another truth, in total opposition to the first. O-Tay ?!

Blessings to you all as you seek the truth,

Tim

 

[ralphinal]

Tim, you asked these questions

What I see here, smacks right in the face of the teachings of the RCC, But, then again, the RCC is way across the board on most issues, since it changes doctrines from generation to generation. -When, for instance was the assumption of Mary dogmatized, 1968, maybe?
How about Limbo? they teach one generation that they have the only truth, then teach the next generation another truth, in total opposition to the first. O-Tay ?!

the Church only defines things when there is opposition. UNtil heretical non-Catholics began to raise the possibility that Mary was in hell, there was no question about her state. Both the Catholic Church and her Orthodox Brothers have held that she was assumed body and soul into heaven at the end of her life. This was never questioned until thousands of years later.

Limbo was a thological speculation stemming from the issue of the state of unbaptised babies that die. It was never a dogma nor was it theologically defined as a real place. Now, the Church simply leaves it to the mercy of God.

Nothing was in opposition. The Church has not contradicted herself.

 

[estesbob]

What I see here, smacks right in the face of the teachings of the RCC, But, then again, the RCC is way across the board on most issues, since it changes doctrines from generation to generation. -When, for instance was the assumption of Mary dogmatized, 1968, maybe?
How about Limbo? they teach one generation that they have the only truth, then teach the next generation another truth, in total opposition to the first. O-Tay ?!

Blessings to you all as you seek the truth,

Tim

It is sad to see those criticize what they do not understand. The Assumption of Mary has been taught by the Church since the 2nd century and the Feast of the Assumption has been celebrated since the mid 5th century. Many Protestants are under false impression that the Church teaches Mary ascended into heaven . That is not true her body was assumed into heaven but not by her own power. in fact the Doctrine does not even assert whether or not she was alive when she was assumed. The Eastern church leans towards her having been alive when she was assumed, the Western Church that she was dead however from the standpoint of the doctrine it doesn’t matter.

Limbo has never been a Doctrine of the Church.

 

[Memaw]

Don’t sue me you invited me here so I cut it and pasted it. I do have experience working with cults.
Actually I did do my research on this particular cult I was working with and it was sometime ago. However to answer your leading question, Yes it is. I am sure that is going to raise a ton of responses but I will say for now I will not reply to any of them. The CC is complicated in that it is so accepted in our communitiesone of the largest business around. largest land owner and at one time the largest distillery.
The first rule in establishing a cult is to alter the Word of God the next to either discredit it or to make their writingsa equal to it as such allowing to add or change the message. Oncew that happens there is trremendous control and almost a complete inability to argue with reason. The area where it does not fit in type as you would usually find is that it does not prohibit its members of protein, essential for cognitive functioning. It will however establish a head and one that can claim exclusicve authority and therby power.
I know I am in trouble. but don’t worry you are in good company with Jehovah Witnesswes, Mormanism and Christian Science to name a few community accepted cults. Ok there. I can hear the guns clicking.

Well, here you are, back on another thread, spreading your lies again. Why am I not surprised. If Brink keeps it up, this one will be closed too.

 

[Memaw]

It is sad to see those criticize what they do not understand. The Assumption of Mary has been taught by the Church since the 2nd century and the Feast of the Assumption has been celebrated since the mid 5th century. Many Protestants are under false impression that the Church teaches Mary ascended into heaven . That is not true her body was assumed into heaven but not by her own power. in fact the Doctrine does not even assert whether or not she was alive when she was assumed. The Eastern church leans towards her having been alive when she was assumed, the Western Church that she was dead however from the standpoint of the doctrine it doesn’t matter.

Limbo has never been a Doctrine of the Church.

The Catholic Church has never actually said that Mary died, it does say that when the course of her earthly life was over, she was assumed into Heaven, body and soul. The oldest prayer on record, after the Lord’s Prayer, is a prayer to Mary.