Why is the Catholic Religion the truth?

[Keikiolu]

Hi

I am looking for a few good reasons why Catholics believe that their Religion is true.

For example I realize that historical evidence from scriptures is generally used as an argument for it being true. However, since all Religions have some sort of historical grounding of their scriptures, this is not enough. I am looking for those two or three key aspects that make the Catholic Church stand out clearly as the only true Religion.

Thanks

Wow,… you don’t want much,… do 'ya…!!

The simple answer is: When you discover that it is so, you’ll know why. Go to Mass, often. Read the Catechism. Read the Vatican II documents. Then all the documents referenced in those documents. Best to you on your journey…! That should keep you busy for the next 47 years.

Mahalo ke Akua…!

E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha.

 

[onenow1]

Hi, Slow
Your post #.94 Paragraph #.4, you hit the nail right on the head. The bible cannot stand alone, that’s why the Catholic Church is like a three legged stool,
Bible, Tradition and Magesterium take one away and it topples.

1 Cor. 11: 2, commends them for following tradition.
2 Thess. 2: 15, commands them to keep traditions.
2 Thess. 3:6, shun those acting not according to tradition.

Tertullian: [197AD] "We are a society with a single religious feeling, a single unity of disipline a single bond of hope."Apology 39,1.

St.Irenaeus,[200AD]: “The church having received this preaching and this faith,although she is disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She likewise believes things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but one mouth.” Against Hersies 1, 10, 2.

St.Cyprian,[250AD]: " God is one and Christ is one, and one is His Church and the faith is one and his people welded together by the glue of concord into a solid unity of one body, unity cannot be rent assunder, nor can the one body of the Church,through the divisions of its structure, be divided into seperate pieces." On the unity of the Church 23.

John. 10:16, there shall be one fold and one shepherd.
1 Cor.12:13, in one spirit we were baptized into one body.

Peace, OneNow1

 

[dcdurel]

Yes, and Jesus taught ONLY by Tradition. He did not write a word of scripture.

Jesus told His apostles to teach and preach the Gospel.
He wanted them to follow His example.
This is entirely Tradition. Teaching and preaching are entirely Tradition.

Scripture is salvation history.
No where does scripture claim to have this Gospel or even a summary of this Gospel the apostles taught and preached. There is not a chapter of the bible, not a paragraph in the entire bible that claims to be a summary of this Gospel. Yet, Jesus says salvation comes from believeing this Gospel they taught and preached, that is, the Gospel handed down in Tradition. (Mark 16:16)

No where does Jesus say salvation comes from reading the Gospels that were written.

This Gospel is handed down entirely in Tradition by the apostles as the Catholic Faith.

Thus, this Gospel handed down in Tradition, together with Salvation History, (Scripture) together with the teaching authority of the Church cannot be separated and must all be believed.

 

[w_stewart]

There is no other society recorded in history as the one founded by Christ other than the Catholic Church. It is only the Church that could trace its history back to the apostles.

Therefore, this Church, the Catholic Church, was the Church promised by Christ that He would abide by it even up to the consummation of the world (Mat. 28:19-20). This was the Church Christ guaranteed that even the gates of Hades could not prevail against it (Mat. 16:18). This was also the Church whom Christ promised to be guarded by the Holy Spirit (John 14:16). Finally, this was the Church referred to by Paul as the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).

 

[kaycee]

Yes, and Jesus taught ONLY by Tradition. He did not write a word of scripture.

Jesus told His apostles to teach and preach the Gospel.
He wanted them to follow His example.
This is entirely Tradition. Teaching and preaching are entirely Tradition.

Scripture is salvation history.
No where does scripture claim to have this Gospel or even a summary of this Gospel the apostles taught and preached. There is not a chapter of the bible, not a paragraph in the entire bible that claims to be a summary of this Gospel. Yet, Jesus says salvation comes from believeing this Gospel they taught and preached, that is, the Gospel handed down in Tradition. (Mark 16:16)

No where does Jesus say salvation comes from reading the Gospels that were written.

This Gospel is handed down entirely in Tradition by the apostles as the Catholic Faith.

Thus, this Gospel handed down in Tradition, together with Salvation History, (Scripture) together with the teaching authority of the Church cannot be separated and must all be believed.

Does your bible consist of only the 4 Gospels and the book of Acts?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Does your bible consist of only the 4 Gospels and the book of Acts?

Our Bible contain 27 NT Books.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Does your bible consist of only the 4 Gospels and the book of Acts?

For the first Century when Jesus was still on earth, he spoke orally. His apostles, and the companions of the apostles wrote the Gospels 30-40 years after the event.

 

[slowly]

…
Without an authority you have a disfunctional team for christ.
…

Interesting point. In relation to my original question I guess one could then rephrase this idea as follows: Unless a Religion has an human/organizational authority on all spiritual matters, it cannot be the True church since then it is bound to be open to interpretation by all its adherents.

In fact, I agree that there must be some kind of an authority or else Religious ideas will diverge.

 

[slowly]

When the NT was written by the founding fathers of THE CHURCH, there were no Protestants. There was only THE CHURCH established by Jesus upon Peter, and passed on through succession. There was no expectation during the writings of the NT that there would be disagreements in interpretation to the degree we have today, especially since St. Paul and others went to such incredible efforts to get and keep everyone on the same page.

God knew that the New Testament was going to be used for at least 2000 years. He knew that Christianity was going to split off into 30000 odd denominations during this 2000 years with each denomination claiming their interpretation of the Bible as correct.

Surely if the Bible is God’s word then he could have (should have) done something about it, not?

THE CHURCH has a Magesterium to keep the interpretations of the canon of THE CHURCH inerrantly singular to the letter and spirit in which they were written. There is no cirularity as implied in other posts.
…

As a previous poster explained, there is no circularity if you accept the Bible as God’s inerrant word. So for the purposes of this argument I concede.

 

[Mannyfit75]

God knew that the New Testament was going to be used for at least 2000 years. He knew that Christianity was going to split off into 30000 odd denominations during this 2000 years with each denomination claiming their interpretation of the Bible as correct.

Many denomination teach different doctrines. Jesus did knew that Christianity will split but he prayed to the Father that they (us) will be One. He does not like it when the East-West Schism happened, nor did he like the Reformation. Jesus is about unity not division.

In Protestantism (the doctrine not the people), there is great division. There are over 1,000 of Protestant Denominations, like the Baptists, Methodist, Lutheran, Evangelical Christians, Anglican, Episcopalians, Assembly of God, Calvinists, Non-Denomination, etc.

The Catholic Church on the other hand, teaches one faith, one baptism, same doctrines. The Magisterium, the bishop in union with the Pope have these teaching authority. There is no different doctrine.

Yes, there are so called Catholics who teach something contrary to the teachings of the Church but they are in error. The final authority is the Magisterium. It teaches infallible teachings on all moral and faith issue.

The authority of the Church comes from God. Since Jesus granted the Apostle authority, and the apostles handed their authority down to their sucessors.

Surely if the Bible is God’s word then he could have (should have) done something about it, not?

The Bible is God’s word but God established Christianity upon the Church first. The Bible came second.

Yes, there was the Scripture before the Church. It was just the Old Testament. There was no final canon of Scripture until late 300 A.D in the Council of Rome, Council of Hippo, and Council of Carthage. These Church Council compilled a list of Books both Old Testament 73 OT text, and 27 NT text.

Later on by the Reformation, the Protestant leaders remove 7 books in the OT. Martin Luther in his translation remove the Letter of James, and have doubt with the Book of Revelation. He didn’t add those books until he was pressured by other Protestants to keep them.

As a previous poster explained, there is no circularity if you accept the Bible as God’s inerrant word. So for the purposes of this argument I concede.

 

[slowly]

Hi, Slow
Your post #.94 Paragraph #.4, you hit the nail right on the head. The bible cannot stand alone, that’s why the Catholic Church is like a three legged stool,
Bible, Tradition and Magesterium take one away and it topples.
…

Yes, but it seems to me that the Magesterium leg is dependent on a particular interpretation of the Bible. So in a sense the Magesterium leg is (using your analogy) is standing on the Bible leg.

Nevertheless, even if you are right with your “three legged stool” analogy, my point is still that even this three tiered plan of God to preserve the true Church has not been very successfull (note again the 30000 Christian denominations).

Again my question is: Why didn’t God foresee this, and if he did, why didn’t he do something about it?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Again my question is: Why didn’t God foresee this, and if he did, why didn’t he do something about it?

Well first, why do you assume He didn’t foresee? He is God. Certainly when one looks at the Old Testament, the Jews (the Chosen People) fell short time, after time, after time, after time. . .yet apparently God felt them worth His time and effort and sent His Son.

As for ‘doing something about it’. . .I for one am grateful that what He is ‘doing about it’ so far is giving us the chance (as He so often did and does for His beloved children) to 'settle it ourselves and to repent and come to unity before He chastises us to help bring us back because we have refused to ‘do it ourselves’. God help us if we prove ourselves as hard-hearted and stubborn as our forebears because He will have to break our hearts of stone and humble us because only the humble are ready to listen and obey instead of bully, demand, and ignore Him.

May God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and lead us to life everlasting. Amen.

 

[onenow1]

Yes, but it seems to me that the Magesterium leg is dependent on a particular interpretation of the Bible. So in a sense the Magesterium leg is (using your analogy) is standing on the Bible leg.

Nevertheless, even if you are right with your “three legged stool” analogy, my point is still that even this three tiered plan of God to preserve the true Church has not been very successfull (note again the 30000 Christian denominations).

Again my question is: Why didn’t God foresee this, and if he did, why didn’t he do something about it?

None knows the mind of God, and His purpose.
I have to diagree I think its been very successful.
The Lord gave us a mind to use how you use it is up to you;
if through no fault of your own you don’t see the light I don’t think it will be held against you. If you know the truth and just dont want to believe it that’s a different story, shame on you.
There’s a verse I don’t know the verse off hand but it goes something like this I’m sure you know it.

Others were using the name of Jesus to heal the sick, and lame,the apostles told him about them doing this; Jesus replied let them be if they are not aganist us they are with us, something like that I think. An interesting parallel to protestantism.

 

[onenow1]

None knows the mind of God, and His purpose.
I have to diagree I think its been very successful.
The Lord gave us a mind to use how you use it is up to you;
if through no fault of your own you don’t see the light I don’t think it will be held against you. If you know the truth and just dont want to believe it that’s a different story, shame on you.
There’s a verse I don’t know the verse off hand but it goes something like this I’m sure you know it.

Others were using the name of Jesus to heal the sick, and lame,the apostles told him about them doing this; Jesus replied let them be if they are not aganist us they are with us, something like that I think. An interesting parallel to protestantism.

I found the verse; Luke 9: 49, John spoke up. Master, he said ’ we saw someone driving out devils in your name, and because he is not with us we tried to stop him.’ But Jesus said to him, ‘You must not stop him: anyone who is not against you is for you.’

 

[StevenFrancis]

Again my question is: Why didn’t God foresee this, and if he did, why didn’t he do something about it?

One thing I think you might be overlooking in your questioning is the free will of man. God gave man free will. That doesn’t mean that we do right with it. Far from it. It doesn’t mean that God wanted thousands of churches. The Jews had to be corrected a few times during Mosaic times, and I believe the multiplicity of Christian sects, each more diluted than the next, will also be corrected in time. That doesn’t keep us from going off course in the first place, however. Free will allows us to succumb to evil and bad judjement all day long. He gives us messengers. He puts people in our paths. He points the way home constantly, but not everyone is even looking or listening. Instead of conforming to God’s Church, and unchanging Christian covenant, we instead try to mold God’s Word, and Traditions to suit our convenience. (somehow justifying war, hatred, bigotry, violence, slavery, tyrany, injustice, envy, jealousy, etc.). We are sinners with free will, who contort the truth to suit our individual whimsy. We don’t WANT the Church to be the Truth. It interferes with our plans. It makes us feel guilty for living in sin. It would mean that we can’t kill our babies because we’re bummed out. It would mean that we shouldn’t have a death penalty. It would mean that we must look upon marriage as a Holy Sacrament rather than a party in Las Vegas. It would mean that people of the same sex can’t even BE married. It would mean that you have a covenental obligation to go to Church on Sunday’s and Holy Days. It would mean that you must acknowledge Mary as the Mother of God, and respect her role in Salvation. It would mean you have to try to understand Trinitarian existence. It would mean that you must put God above all else. Everything. He must ALWAYS be the FIRST consideration. Even above the Superbowl, March Madness, and Powerball winnings. It would mean you could not worship the almighty dollar. It would mean you must love others more than you love yourself. It would mean you have to give your life to save another’s. I’m just getting started. You get the idea. Very tall order. Who wants that? Of course there’s thousands of Churches. If we don’t start coming around soon to Jesus’ Church, there will be a new “Christian” denomination for every two or three people with a similar view point, or to get more to the point…no Church at all, which is already being spouted off by some very respected and “enlightened” people as being the solution to all the world’s problems. It very well may be, if all you think of is this single temporal existence on earth. True Christian faith is HARD. It is the most rewarding existence possible while still exchanging air in your lungs, but it is stultifyingly HARD.

God DOES know this. That’s WHY He left us only ONE true Church, which retains the seat of Saint Peter, the Magesterium, the Dogmas, etc., etc. etc… It has not been successful entirely, because there are an awful lot of lost lambs right now, admittedly. Even in light of this, however, as He promised, His bride, the Church IS STILL here, and always will be. It will continue to fill it’s mission in salvation history; past, present and future, preserving The High Priests’ teachings in Sacred Scripture AND Holy Tradition, just as it was left with Peter all those many years ago. So, as earnestly seeking pilgrims continue to discover and re-discover the truth, Jesus and his glorious Bride await with arms wide open. Ready to feast and rejoice at the return of it’s prodigal children.

May God bless and keep you,

Peace,

Steven

 

[Robert902]

The Catholic Church is founded by Jesus Christ. He build his Church upon Peter, and the Apostles. The Apostles then handed their authority to their successors to the present day.

That is why the Catholic openly professes that the Catholic Church is the One Church of Christ. This is supported in Scripture and history.

It might be supported by Catholic history, but The Apostle Paul certainly doesn’t seem to agree with you.

Eph 1:22-23 And He put all under His feet and gave Him to be head over all things to the church. Which is His body; the fulness of Him who fills all in all. NKJV.

I’m not unusually bright, but this is very clear…even to me. Jesus Christ is the head of the one and only true church, and we the believers are the body. Any other description of God’s church is just the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting.

Eph 4:14-16 That we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting. But speaking the truth in love may grow up in all things into Him who is the head-Christ-. NKJV.

If it doesn’t agree with The Holy Bible, why bother?

God Bless,
Robert

 

[Church_Militant]

It might be supported by Catholic history, but The Apostle Paul certainly doesn’t seem to agree with you.
…
**
If it doesn’t agree with The Holy Bible, why bother?**

God Bless,
RobertOh but it does. Paul taught the same Eucharistic Real Presence that we believe in 1st Corinthians 10:16-17 and 11:23-30 and he certainly did teach that one should be in obedience & submission to those set over you by God in His church (Hebrews 13:17) and he also went up to Jerusalem to present himself to the apostles to insure that his teachings were the same as theirs.

Also in Acts 15 he and Barnabas were sent to the apostles because Paul apparently had no authority to settle the issue himself.

So if what your church teaches does not align with both the Bible and the history of the early church, then why bother to hang with them? Isn’t that a different gospel?

 

[onenow1]

Hi, Robert
Christ gave the power to the Apostles to spread His Gospel; now I ask you aren’t the apostles that he appointed our represenitves ? Does’nt it seem logical they would appoint represenitives, before they died, as a matter of fact He did when He said; John. 20:21 as the Father sent me, so am I sending you.

Matt. 16:18,upon this rock[Peter] I will build my Church.
Matt. 16:19,gave Peter the key’s; power to bind and loose.
Matt. 22:31-32, ’ Simon, Simon ! Look, Satan has got his wish to sift you all like wheat; but I have prayed for you Simon, that your faith may not fail, and once you have recovered, you in turn must strengthen your brothers].Why would Christ need Peter to strengthen his brothers, can’t He do it Himself ?

Acts.1:13-26- headed the meeting with the election of Matthias
Acts.2:14-led the apostles on Pentecost.
Acts.2:41- received the first converts.
Acts.3:6-7-performed the first miracle after Pentecost.
Acts.5:1-11-inflicted the first punishment Ananias & Saphira.
Acts.8:21-excommunacated the firstheretic, Simon magnus.
Acts.10:44-46-received revelation to admit gentiles into Church
Acts.15:7-led first council in Jerusalem.
Acts.15:19-pronounces first dogmatic decesion.

Peter’s name appears 195 times, more then all the rest put together.

Peace, OneNow1

 

[Mannyfit75]

It might be supported by Catholic history, but The Apostle Paul certainly doesn’t seem to agree with you.

Eph 1:22-23 And He put all under His feet and gave Him to be head over all things to the church. Which is His body; the fulness of Him who fills all in all. NKJV.

I beg to differ.

Jesus founded the Church and He built it up Upon Peter. “You are Peter, and Upon this Rock I will built My Church.” Jesus grafted Peter into himself. In the Aramaic language, Jesus would use. Kepha for Rock.

“You are Kepha, and Upon this Kepha I will built My Church.”

I’m not unusually bright, but this is very clear…even to me. Jesus Christ is the head of the one and only true church, and we the believers are the body. Any other description of God’s church is just the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting.

The Church does acknowledge that Jesus is the head of the Church and Peter is His Prime Minister which in the OT was the stewart of the kingdom of Isreael.

2 Sam. 7:16; Psalm 89:3-4; 1 Chron.17:12,14 - God promises to establish the Davidic kingdom forever on earth.

Matt. 1:1 - Matthew clearly establishes this tie of David to Jesus. Jesus is the new King of the new House of David, and the King will assign a chief steward to rule over the house while the King is in heaven.

Luke 1:32 - the archangel Gabriel announces to Mary that her Son would be given “the throne of His father David.”

Matt. 16:19 - Jesus gives Peter the “keys of the kingdom of heaven.” While most Protestants argue that the kingdom of heaven Jesus was talking about is the eternal state of glory (as if Peter is up in heaven letting people in), the kingdom of heaven Jesus is speaking of actually refers to the Church on earth. In using the term “keys,” Jesus was referencing Isaiah 22 (which is the only place in the Bible where keys are used in the context of a kingdom).

 

[Mannyfit75]

I’m not unusually bright, but this is very clear…even to me. Jesus Christ is the head of the one and only true church, and we the believers are the body. Any other description of God’s church is just the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting.

Eph 4:14-16 That we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting. But speaking the truth in love may grow up in all things into Him who is the head-Christ-. NKJV.

If it doesn’t agree with The Holy Bible, why bother?

Matt. 16:19 - whatever Peter binds or looses on earth is bound or loosed in heaven / when the Prime Minister to the King opens, no one shuts. This “binding and loosing” authority allows the keeper of the keys to establish “halakah,” or rules of conduct for the members of the kingdom he serves. Peter’s “keys” fit into the “gates” of Hades which also represent Peter’s pastoral authority over souls.

Matt. 23:2-4 - the “binding and loosing” terminology used by Jesus was understood by the Jewish people. For example, Jesus said that the Pharisees “bind” heavy burdens but won’t move (“loose”) them with their fingers. Peter and the apostles have the new binding and loosing authority over the Church of the New Covenant.

Matt. 13:24-52 -Jesus comparing the kingdom of heaven to a field, a mustard seed, leaven, and a net demonstrate that the kingdom Jesus is talking about is the universal Church on earth, not the eternal state of glory. Therefore, the keys to the “kingdom of heaven” refers to the authority over the earthly Church.

Matt. 25:1-2 - Jesus comparing the kingdom of heaven to ten maidens, five of whom were foolish, further shows that the kingdom is the Church on earth. This kingdom cannot refer to the heavenly kingdom because there are no fools in heaven!

Mark 4:26-32 - again, the “kingdom of God” is like the seed which grows and develops. The heavenly kingdom is eternal, so the kingdom to which Peter holds the keys of authority is the earthly Church.

Luke 9:27 - Jesus says that there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the “kingdom of God.” This kingdom refers to the earthly kingdom of Christ, which Jesus established by His death and resurrection on earth.