Where is Catholicism in the Bible?

[stinkcat_14]

I’m interested in the truth.

Next question for you: What truth have you learned since you’ve been here. In other words, you have come in here with many ideas about the Catholic Church and of course they have been refuted here. This is the best place to learn the truth about the Catholic Church. Now, can you tell us how the truth you have learned here has changed your views of the Catholic Church?

 

[Mannyfit75]

if you read the gospels you’ll notice that is exactly what happened with Jesus.

I read the Gospel daily. The question is not if, the fact is I do read it. That doesn’t disprove the Catholic position, if you are trying to convince me any different.

 

[mercygate]

I found this brief summary of some of the history of the Catholic Church, and keep looking for more of it so people know what the Catholic church was all about in history.

I remember learning about the Holy Roman Empire in world history class in high school. What do you think the romans were about? They were about power. So the Catholic church started trying to take control of the Empire. Christians don’t want wroldly power or control. They want to save the world. so do you still think the Catholic Church has always been the same?

First of all, you just told us that all you need is the Bible. Then you tell us that your definitive understanding of Catholic history was formed in high school. Next you quote a notoriously bigotted anti-Catholic web site in affirmation of your position.

The idea of “history” promulgated by Bennett couldn’t get him a pass in a creditable Protestant seminary, he is so biased. For example, he cites the Donation of Constantine, a well-known forgery, as if it were some big secret. Actually, the forgery was revealed by Lorenzo Valla in 1440, a papal aide – y’know, a guy who worked for the Pope. I believe his work earned him a commendation from his boss. Although the Donation had been cited as authorization for papal temporal power, the deterioration of the Empire and the inability of the civil state to function left the Papacy, a centralized operation, in a unique position to fill in the gaps in supplying the needs of the people. The Donation was hardly necessary.

I didn’t learn that in Catholic documents or in a Catholic school. I studied my history at the University of Michigan under the professor who first popularized the idea that the Crusades were an economic predation and not a holy enterprise: hardly a friend of the Catholic Church. Even under such a professor I came away with an understanding of primary documents and a more balanced view than Bennett. I wasn’t Catholic at the time, so I wasn’t interested in making the Church look good.

Allan: you say you are interested in the truth. Do you really mean it? If you do, stick around. Some of the responses you will get here might generate more heat than light. But if you really want to do the homework, you will come a lot closer to it than you are now.

When it comes to Catholic Church teaching, I recommend the Catechism of the Catholic Church*.*For history, a book like Triumph by H. W. Crocker would be a good start: an easy read and it covers 2000 years. He gets his facts straight, even though he is unabashedly pro-Catholic – but you could use a little of that considering the diet you’ve been on. For clear Catholic answers to some of your objections to Catholic teaching, you could give Karl Keating’s Catholicism and Fundamentalism a go.

Others here have said: object to what I believe, but at least object to what I really believe and not to what you think I believe.

 

[MrS]

The Church and State at the time were very powerful at the time, and back then the Catholic Church had some secular power. That power has weaken since then.

.

Actually the Church and the State were virtually one for centuries. The “power” has separated as opposed to weakened.

Can’t really say if that is a good thing or not

 

[Mommyof02green]

I found this brief summary of some of the history of the Catholic Church, and keep looking for more of it so people know what the Catholic church was all about in history.

Where did you find this summary? What is your source?

I’ve noticed that on many, (not all) but many of your postings you quote things but fail to site the source. It would be helpful for all of us if you site the source.

I remember learning about the Holy Roman Empire in world history class in high school.

I remember learning why we need to site the source in High School English Class. I remember how that’s important. I remember how that helps others find the material for themselves to read and learn.

Allan you had to say this about the Bible:

You have to read the entire thing to really understand it, not just what other people tell you.

Well the same hold true to other sources. I have to read the entire thing to really understand it, not just the bits and pieces that Allan is telling me.

Allan, please site your sources.
Thanks and God Bless.

 

[steveandersen]

…
I remember learning about the Holy Roman Empire in world history class in high school. What do you think the romans were about? …

Apparently you didn’t learn (or weren’t taught) very well if you think that the Holy Roman Empire and the Roman Empire were the same polity.

What’s the old historian’s joke? The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, Roman, or an Empire.

 

[kaycee]

My friend you are the one who made the assertion that the Bible is sufficient for salvation, the onus is upon you to prove that it is.

Perhaps the reason you did not support your view with scriptural proofs is because you know very well that “sola scriptura” is 100% unbiblical.

There is not one, not even one, passage of scripture that suggests that the bible is all we need for salvation. You are basing your beliefs on a man made tradition, and we all know what Christ had to say about those.

I think the Idea he is trying to convey is that we have the written teaching of the prophets, Jesus, and the apostles in our Bible. What more do we need than the direct teachings of God through the scripture? This is all the early church had. Do we need something different for salvation than the first generation of Christians?

 

[Mommyof02green]

I never said I didn’t believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

I am saying he’s not the Father.

It is talking about the second coming of Jesus and it says that the dead in christ shall rise, meaning they are to dead or asleep.

I’ve already said it. I’ll say it again. She was the mother of the Son of God(Father).

i never said i was a protestant, I am a Christian. that’s all you need to know about my religion.

as far as the trinity is concerned, the word isn’t in the bible, so i don’t talk about it.

All you need is in the bible. Its all there. its complete.

I know that I’m Christian. I also know that I’m a “Catholic”-Christian.

Allan has made it clear that he is Christian.
However, I’m starting to wonder if he’s a “Christadelphian”-Christian

Christadelphian: christadelphian.org.uk/

Of course only Allan can answer that! Allan is the only one that knows what Allan truly believes. Allan is the only one that knows what Allan’s religion is.

 

[st_lucy]

I know that I’m Christian. I also know that I’m a “Catholic”-Christian.

Allan has made it clear that he is Christian.
However, I’m starting to wonder if he’s a “Christadelphian”-Christian

Christadelphian: christadelphian.org.uk/

Of course only Allan can answer that! Allan is the only one that knows what Allan truly believes. Allan is the only one that knows what Allan’s religion is.

I think that Allen really doesn’t know what Allen is. Sadly I have a brother like Allen, who was raised in a strong Catholic family but because of his own lack of faith and education has fallen prey to those small protestant groups who think they are doing the Christian world a great favor by find those who are weak in their faith and steering them astray from God.

Allen has stated that he doesn’t believe he is a protestant, so I am thinking that Allen doesn’t really have certain denomination he belongs to. So my guess is he doesn’t believe in going to church, now any good Christian knows that you must go to Church. Allen at least at Church you will get a person who has studied the Scripture help you out with some of the interpretations. As has been pointed out in previous posts the KJV that you read is not an accurate translation of the bible. In fact your version is not right translation from the original version. For the first three hundred years there was no bible. But yet the Christian faith continued.

You need help understanding the bible in its right contents. As I have stated before I really believe that the Holy Spirit has guided you here. Please try to listen to some of the advise here and do some real research by some credible sources. And if you have a source you want to quote at least give us a heads up on who you are citing so that we can help.

I really think that the rest of us can help Allen (and those like him - my older brother) by praying that he will not continue to fall prey to those who are false prophets and who are only wolves in sheep clothing.

 

[ProdigalSonOfOz]

What more do we need than the direct teachings of God through the scripture? This is all the early church had. Do we need something different for salvation than the first generation of Christians?

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Yet not every word that came from the mouth of God was included in the NT…

John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

John 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book.

Mark 4:33 With many such parables he spoke the word to them . . .
- Yet none of these other parables are recorded in scripture

**Mark 6:34 **. . . he began to teach them many things.

• None of these “many things” are recorded here

**John 16:12 **I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.

• Perhaps these many things were spoken during His post- Resurrection appearances alluded to in Acts 1:2-8?

Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

• Once again this information is not mentioned in scripture

Christ clearly commanded that we live by EVERY word that comes from the mouth of God, not just what happened to be included within the Bible.The early Church had much more than the scriptures. They had a living sacred Tradition, and the authority of the church through apostolic succession.

 

[Scottgun]

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Yet not every word that came from the mouth of God was included in the NT…

John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

John 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book.

Mark 4:33 With many such parables he spoke the word to them . . .
- Yet none of these other parables are recorded in scripture

**Mark 6:34 **. . . he began to teach them many things.

• None of these “many things” are recorded here

**John 16:12 **I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.

• Perhaps these many things were spoken during His post- Resurrection appearances alluded to in Acts 1:2-8?

Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

• Once again this information is not mentioned in scripture

Christ clearly commanded that we live by EVERY word that comes from the mouth of God, not just what happened to be included within the Bible.The early Church had much more than the scriptures. They had a living sacred Tradition, and the authority of the church through apostolic succession.

Yep. And let’s not forget the Protestant Pickle:

St. Paul commanded the Thessalonians in 2 Thes 2:14 (Douay-Rheims) to keep the traditions that they had been taught either orally or in writing.

Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by epistle.

The protestant dilemma is to come up with a citation from Scripture where an Apostle changes this command to limit our acceptance to written tradition only.

 

[Mommyof02green]

Allen has stated that he doesn’t believe he is a protestant, so I am thinking that Allen doesn’t really have certain denomination he belongs to. So my guess is he doesn’t believe in going to church, now any good Christian knows that you must go to Church.

The Christadelphians meet in groups called ‘ecclesias’, a name taken from the Greek word which is translated ‘church’ in the New Testament. The original Greek word is ‘ekklesis’, which does not refer to a building but means ‘an invitation to come out’. As with the brethren and sisters of Christ in the 1st Century, to be part of an ‘ecclesia’ is to be part of the body of those ‘called out’. A study of the New Testament Scriptures will show that the first century ‘ecclesias’ were meeting as groups of believers with no emphasis placed on the buildings they worshipped in.
Source: biblelight.org/dawn/whochr4.htm

• They meet weekly on Sundays for a Memorial Meeting or Breaking of Bread

• Their local group is called an ecclesia which is Greek for “congregation”. (Plural is “ecclesias.”) They average about 20 members each.

• Most of the ecclesias meet in each other’s homes or in rented halls. A few own their own buildings.

Source: religioustolerance.org/chr_delp.htm

This fits almost in line with Allan’s comments about not going to church. Christadelphian’s beliefs are that it doesn’t matter where you worship God. It can be done at home. (At least that’s what I gather from the web-sources.)

Also, Christadelphian’s do not have clergy and the average size of an ecclesia is 20. So I would venture to say that could be possible that a group of 2 could make an ecclesia. (a group of 2 could be husband and wife; or 2 friends; or 2 siblings; parent and child; etc)

However, Allen is the only one that knows. All of this is just my opinion based on what I’ve read from Allen and based on what is my understanding of Christadelphian’s beliefs

 

[st_lucy]

This fits almost in line with Allan’s comments about not going to church. Christadelphian’s beliefs are that it doesn’t matter where you worship God. It can be done at home. (At least that’s what I gather from the web-sources.)

Also, Christadelphian’s do not have clergy and the average size of an ecclesia is 20. So I would venture to say that could be possible that a group of 2 could make an ecclesia. (a group of 2 could be husband and wife; or 2 friends; or 2 siblings; parent and child; etc)

However, Allen is the only one that knows. All of this is just my opinion based on what I’ve read from Allen and based on what is my understanding of Christadelphian’s beliefs

Yes, this is what my brother believes, he will quote form scripture, “where one or more are gathered in my name, there I will be.” Which is true but unfortunately it is only half the truth. As Catholic Christians we know that the full truth is that God is present everywhere, but is more truly present to the Holy Eucharist Body, Soul and Divinity. Now why in the world would you ever wont to miss a single mass if you can receive Him in His fullness every day?

 

[vz71]

I know that I’m Christian. I also know that I’m a “Catholic”-Christian.

Allan has made it clear that he is Christian.
However, I’m starting to wonder if he’s a “Christadelphian”-Christian

Christadelphian: christadelphian.org.uk/

After reading the entirety of the message stream, I am leaning towards the idea that perhaps Allen is ‘Oneness Pentecostal’.

 

[MrS]

Yes, this is what my brother believes, he will quote form scripture, “where one or more are gathered in my name, there I will be.” Which is true but unfortunately it is only half the truth. As Catholic Christians we know that the full truth is that God is present everywhere, but is more truly present to the Holy Eucharist Body, Soul and Divinity. Now why in the world would you ever wont to miss a single mass if you can receive Him in His fullness every day?

If Allen would just go back about 5 verses or so “… take another… take 2 or 3… and if he does not hear you take it to the Church. And if he still does not listen (obey), let him be as a gentile, and tax collector. Whereever two or more are gathered in MY NAME (not for their own purpose), there I am.”

This passage is a clear example of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, with the Church at the top, not the bottom.

Allen, it seems, is sitting on an upside down pyramid… and it will tumble soon.

.

 

[Mommyof02green]

After reading the entirety of the message stream, I am leaning towards the idea that perhaps Allen is ‘Oneness Pentecostal’.

I don’t know…

I was leaning that way also, but Allan’s first post just stuck with me:

In the Bible, there is no mention of Pope, Bishop, or Mass, or most of things that Catholics talk about.

It’s my understanding that “Oneness Pentecostals” have Bishops.
Source: apostolicassembly.org/bishops.aspx

In my opinion, I’m 99% certain (based on Allan’s posting) that Allan rejects the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. That’s the only thing I’m relatively certain on.

There is nothing more I can add or say. The only way to find out what Allan believes is for Allan to say. Hopefully, Allan will come back and share with us. This is all just assumptions and opinions until Allan shares with us.

Personally I’m hoping that Allan will share, it easier talking to someone when you know at least where he or she stands. (In my opinion of course)

 

[mlldrl]

I’ve been reading this thread since its beginning and have noticed that the OP never (almost never) responds to questions posed to him. Most of you have given him wonderfully detailed information but it seems as though he doesn’t read it. At a minimum he doesn’t respond in any meaningful way.

So I guess my question is at what point do you stop casting pearls?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[vz71]

So I guess my question is at what point do you stop casting pearls?

God Bless,
Michael

Well, the problem I see is that my view is entirely different.
Much of the information I have read here is great, some I have never heard before, and much of it is useful in my own faith and understanding of my church.

So while the OP may not care for the information, many on this thread do.

Keep it up guys. I’m learning a lot.

As long as there is at least one out there wanting to receive this information, I do not believe the casting pearls analogy can work.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Well, the problem I see is that my view is entirely different.
Much of the information I have read here is great, some I have never heard before, and much of it is useful in my own faith and understanding of my church.

So while the OP may not care for the information, many on this thread do.

Keep it up guys. I’m learning a lot.

As long as there is at least one out there wanting to receive this information, I do not believe the casting pearls analogy can work.

I think you have a very good point here. Whether Allan is actually interested in learning something is certainly up for debate. However, the thoughtful, patient responses that he gets has certainly increased my knowledge of our faith.

 

[Montie_Claunch]

I’m interested in the truth.

Wonderful. I have a wonderful truth for you dear allen. It is called the Church. It is something that Jesus founded. In Jesus’ written word, the bible, we find that in Mat. 16:16-18 Jesus founded a church upon a Rock which was Peter, and Jesus promised that this church which he was laying upon Peter would never Fall to the “Gates of Hell” (KJV) meaning that it would always teach the right doctrines.
In the start of Acts they put someone else in Judas’ “Bishopirc”(KJV) which tells us that there is such a thing as Aposotlic (derived from apostle which one can find throughout the bible) Succession.
In one of Peters epistles he tells us that he is in “Babylon” which was a codeword at the time for Rome.
So Allen, I know you love Jesus and you want to follow Jesus and what the Bible tells us, and I do to. So hey, Lets go and Join Jesus’ Church. Now which Church has Peter as the Rock and has Apostolic Succession from him from Rome? The Catholic Church!
Come on Allen lets go do what Jesus and his word tells us to do and join the Catholic Church. Arn’t you excited about this, we’re going to do what Jesus and the bible tells us to do? I know thats what you want to do.