It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Your Beef with Catholicism

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by EricD
Catholics do not consider the Pope as a surrogate for Jesus. Catholics do not pray to the Pope. They do not expect the Pope to perform miracles. They do not expect the Pope to grant them salvation.
Eric


But they expect the Church to be and do all these things.
No salvation except thru the Church. Got to go via the official channels, or you wont be saved. That's why the split occurred between Catholics and Protestants in the first place.

So he's not the surrogate for Jesus, but he's the manager of the Official Franchise.




posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 09:25 PM
link   
well Eric i'll admit that you got me on a couple of things. you are right that some of my beefs with Catholicism are also practiced by alot of other 'mainstream' Christian factions. And in that respect I dislike those factions just as much. I think the teaching is skewed.

but my beliefs are definitely of a minority so it doesnt really matter. I'm a Christian, and I think Jesus died for our sins, but I do not think Jesus is God, I think Jesus was created by God, the God of the Hebrews, therefore his son, and that he sits in his right hand, as it is written. Jesus walked around saying "I am the son of God", he didn't walk around saying "I am God incarnate!".

yet they still killed him.. and all he wanted to do was help people. heal the sick, teach the ways of righteous living, and of God. but God had plans for Jesus, despite what Jesus necessarily wanted or knew or was thinking at the time. His spirit was somewhat disabled while in the flesh before the first death I guess you could say. This means God and Jesus were seperate beings, and one was acting .. almost against the other. God was setting the stage to allow Jesus to be crucified. Now you may think Jesus was God in the flesh and was making all of this happen as he was walking the Earth as a Man, but I find that to be hard to believe and even comical.

For why did he say, shortly before his death, "God, why have you forsaken me?" Certainly he was not God himself, he and God were two and he was calling to God. He therefore could not have been God in his entirety in that moment, on the cross.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 10:19 PM
link   
my beef with catholicism is that i wasted 8 years of my life learning how to be a good christian in elementary school. Those catholic teachers always ever teach you to think about things in one way, meanwhile there are 4 other points of view. I blame catholicism for holding me back from my true thinking state. I am now an athiest. I have no beef against jesus though i believe he was a great man, mainly because he changed the world- for positive or negative is still one of my debates. (i dont think jesus was divine, i think he was just a man.)



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   
I want to take a minute to step back from any ongoing debate or discussion of issues to thank everyone for having an ongoing, active thread (on a topic that people feel passionately about) that is mostly free of rancor and vitriol.

I enjoy the give and take and your forcing me to check facts and assumptions.

Thanks again,

Eric



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Eric,
here's this about an audience with the pope
The pope
I think I read in another article where you have to call him Master, a title only used for Jesus, there's no mention of it here.
Here's something from wiki on the holy doors,

[edit] Ceremonial of the Jubilee
The most distinctive feature in the ceremonial of the Jubilee is the unwalling and the final walling up of the "holy door" in each of the four great basilicas which the pilgrims are required to visit. The doors are opened by the Pope at the beginning of the Jubilee and then sealed up again afterwards. Previously, the rite included the use of a silver hammer (for removing the concrete at the opening) and a silver trowel (for sealing it again after the Jubilee). The Pope would pound on the wall, which would then be set to collapse. This ritual caused injury of bystanders, so for the Great Jubilee of 2000, Pope John Paul II simplified the rite considerably, opening and closing the doors with his hands.

Traditionally, the Pope himself opens and closes the doors of St. Peter's Basilica personally, and designates a cardinal to open those of St. John Lateran, St. Mary Major, and St. Paul outside the Walls. In the Great Jubilee, the Pope chose to open all the doors personally, while designating cardinals to close all the doors except that of St. Peter's.

Catholic parishes all over the world share a similar rite dedicating a door for the purposes of the Jubilee Year in order to accomodate its parishioners who do not intend to visit Rome for the occasion. Local parishes' doors include the same indulgence given to the Basilica doors.


[edit] The Jubilee Indulgence
It can be hard to nail down what is actually being taught by the RCC with all the latin.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Clearskies,

Thanks for the post. In order of your points:

1) I have never heard of anyone being required or wanting to call the Pope "master'. Maybe someone has, but it certainly isn't taught as being a correct or accepted honorific. Neither is the term 'Lord' as was mentioned earlier without substantiation.

Is this quote from the bottom of the link you provided the crux of your problem?
___
Through the centuries, the Ring of the Fisherman did not become known for its practical use but by its feudal symbolism. Borrowing from the traditions developed by medieval monarchs, followers showed respect to the reigning pope by kneeling at his feet and kissing the Ring of the Fisherman. The tradition continues to this day.
___

To the best of my knowledge that is a common occurrence and happens daily. Are you claiming that it should not?

2) Thank you for pointing out about the Jubilee. Is that what the image that I couldn't view in the other post about?

Were you posting that for my clarification or because you had a problem with it (or both)?

Thanks,

Eric



posted on Aug, 15 2007 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
My only "beef" with Catholicism is the pedophilia.

Then your beef, though this thread is against Catholicism, is actually unfounded because not all Catholics are pedophiles nor is the church as a whole based on pedophilia. Certain people in the church are guilty of this not the church. As are people in every organization. So that would mean you cannot go fill your car with gas, because there is a pedophile that works for every major oil company etc etc - an example.



posted on Aug, 15 2007 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vipassana
Maybe its not considered extremist but it is certainly false.

False according to whom? Is the praise and worship of God false? Can you substantiate your claim that it is false?

Originally posted by Vipassana
From my view catholics are living unconventionally, who would willingly follow a false doctrine?

You don't know many Catholics do you. We live very normal lives. We wake in the morning and do all the normal things people do. We don't go and perform sacrificial rituals in the dead of night or eat cats and dogs. We are really your normal everyday Christian without the BS. You do however get those that practice ANY religion to the extreme but this is usually the exception rather than the norm. We willing follow a God that is definitely not false. One can shoot holes in the teachings of the bible but the fundamental reason for the existence of the Catholicism is God.


Originally posted by Vipassana
I would hope that the church does not dictate their core beliefs.


Nothing is dictated. Thou shalt not kill. Hey guess what, we have a choice. We don't have to follow any human priest, cardinal, bishop or pope. We follow God and we choose what we want to do on not do. The priest doesn't knock on your door to check on you!



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vipassana
Just because you say "Jesus" before you go to bed does not absolve you of your sins. The idea is insane, just most of the world hasn't realized it.

Where did you get this? I am Catholic and I do not know any others that say "Jesus" before going to bed. We may pray but we don't sit up in bed and look up and say "Jesus". deny ignorance.


Originally posted by Vipassana
As for the pope, sure many don't "worship" him, but many do. He wears a crown of gold, and people will go by the thousands just to see him.

No one, as far as i know "worship" the pope. That is just ludicrous! They go to see him yes but they don't worship him. It's like people going to see the Dali lama etc. It isn't to "worship him". deny ignorance.


Originally posted by Vipassana
Again, the whole notion of a pope is truly laughable. It gives a false appearance of the papacy being closer to God than others, which surely is not the case.

Why is it laughable? Why should having a leader laughable? He probably is closer to God than most - that is that case.


Originally posted by Vipassana
Is it necessary to build a massive palace in order to practice religion? I don't care how long ago it was, in fact that makes it all the more ridiculous.

It wasn't built to practice religion. I think you need to help yourself here but being a good person i will help you: go here to find out more

deny ignorance.


Originally posted by Vipassana
I dont have any offhand examples, but I am certain that over the years Catholics have been very selective about waht goes in or out of the bible.

I am going to help you with this one too because I think that sometimes the translations of the bible and how we got to the current version is a little misunderstood. deny ignorance. So go here to read a short history



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vipassana
Sure there are many great people out there who practice these religions, I have many friends who are Christian. But just because they are nice people does not mean they are correct in their faith.

And it also does not mean you are correct in your faith. Perhaps you are following the most erroneous one and not your "friends". Or perhaps I am doing that, BUT the fact of the matter is freedom to do as you wish and not have someone dictate that which one is following is the wrong religion. Because as far as i am concerned no one has the right to say that someone is following the wrong religion. It's a matter of choice.



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
You don't pray to someone who is alive.

Correct. We don't pray to him at all. He is just the head of the church - he isn't God or Jesus.


Originally posted by Clearskies
When someone meets with the pope, they must kneel,kiss his ring and call him lord(can't find that right now, I'm tired and it's too late)


And you won't find it on a Catholic site. No one kneels and calls him "Lord" because he isn't Lord. I will help you on this one. Easy to find this one really and very quick.
Source

Say "Your Holiness" or "Most Holy Father" when speaking directly to the pontiff, no matter what your religious affiliation.


It goes hand in hand with meeting the ruler or head of ANY country etc. Not rocket science at all
and if you are not Catholic then you just shake his hand and not kiss his ring but he still has a title that you will use out of respect. Kinda like if you hate GWB you will probably still shake his hand and call him Mr President.


If someone were visiting the President of the United States from another country, say Germany or Japan, the American people would definitely expect that person to act accordingly, dress accordingly, shake hands or whatever it is you do when you visit our President. The Pope is just another guy, that's true, but when a respectable person visits somewhere else they treat whoever greets them with the dignity and respect appropriate to that culture. If you were visiting the Chief of the Hookahs tribe in East Zimbabwe you wouldn't just walk up to him and shake his hand, I hope, it just may get chopped off if you insulted him and it is their custom to do so. This is an extreme example, but the meaning is the same. When someone comes to your house, do you have expectations about how you are to be treated?



Originally posted by Clearskies
What do you think people pay money for when the pope opens those doors in Rome for them to walk through and recieve forgiveness?????


You don't go there to be forgiven
you go there to recieve a blessing. If you go with a tour group you will pay - Yes! But - ok let me help you with this one too because i know you said you were tired:
Source

Tickets for the Wednesday, 11:00 A. M., papal audience are free and may be obtained from the Office of the Prefettura of the Papal Household. Telephone: 698.83865 Fax: 698.85863


Just an example. IF you go with a tour group you can pay up to 41 euro.
OH and another
because you are tired.

Source

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE AUDIENCE TICKETS ARE FREE, and as long are you make a reservation we will provide one for you. While the tickets are free, we ask you to consider making a free will donation per ticket in order for us to continue this service and to help us with our many other ministries. But a donation is NOT required.


I hope i have managed to enlighten you a bit more. Sleep tight.



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by IamBoon
I have a beef. It is misleading, false, arrogant, and dimeaning to the spirit that we call humanity.


What is? Can you elaborate on what you are saying? Can you give some sort of substance to your claims? Do you have a full understanding of why you are saying this? Can you give me links to sites that you have used to build your perception? Why do you call it demeaning. To whom and why?

If you have something to say at least give a little more detail to your post so that we can interact with you in some way or other.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 04:36 AM
link   
Not to sidetrack this too much, but I think the confusion on the Trinity doctrine is perhaps related to the usage of the word for God. For example, in the original hebrew, the word for God in Genesis was Elohiym. Later, the same word was used again to refer to angels. A thorough study on this topic reveals that Elohiym (God of the gods) and the elohiym (angels) were a specific "class," of beings. Michael Heiser (biblical scholar with a hefty list of ancient languages to his credit) describes them as "Spirit" beings, as opposed to the other gods who were frequently flesh or what approximated flesh, anyway. Christ fits into this picture as being derived from the class of Elohiym, however, He was born into a fleshly body -- only the second time in history this had occured, the first time being the creation of Adam.. As the texts reveal, Christ is the second Adam. He succeeds where Adam failed. There's alot more of course, but that's a brief description for starters.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 05:16 AM
link   
I am by no means an apologist for Roman Catholicism, but I do have a few words to say on their behalf:

1. Although their choice of books to put in the bible are a matter that should be addressed and very suspect, I don't believe the texts that were put in the bible were seriously modified. There may have been a couple modifications, but proving it would be nigh on impossible. Overall, the bulk of the texts appear intact, primarily because for the first 1000 years of their church's history, they didn't teach or follow most of what was in it, nor allow anyone else to read it, nor provide it in the common tongue, nor did they have a printing press on which to print and distribute it to the common folk - so really, hardly no one had a clue what was in the books that did remain. As a result, much of it was not taught. Instead, the papacy created their own version of what they found relevant, which wasn't much. lol.

I fail to see why it would be necessary to dramatically alter texts they weren't going to be sharing with their parishoners anyway. What would be the point? Completed biblical texts were rare and horded like gold, as it would take a very long time to write it all down by hand, on parchments and so forth. I just don't see what advantage it would have to modify it. They simply didn't care very much what it said or teach most of it back then, as they looked to the papacy for their answers. Not every church had their own copy of the accepted texts, and therefore, they looked to the single authority of the papacy for their answers.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. They were, afterall, still human.

2. The issue of RCC pedophilia is best understood in light of the ongoing Pederasty of ancient Greece and Rome, which just never stopped. The apprentice became the altar boy and the altar boy became the priest, and the cycle continued for 2000 years. Essentially, the pedophilia in the RCC is the remnant of pagan pederasty. It was an accepted and frequently practiced social form of the time. It's only been in the last 40 years or so, that pedophilia and pederasty have become very sore topics and frowned upon so heavily, primarily because we better understand human psychology and realize children and young teenagers, don't have the maturity or understanding for such relationships. We have matured as a culture.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   
An excerpt on the subject of pederasty from wikipedia


In antiquity, pederasty as an educational institution for the inculcation of moral and cultural values, as well as a form of sexual expression, entered history from the Archaic period onwards in Ancient Greece, though Cretan ritual objects reflecting an already formalized practice date to the late Minoan civilization, around 1650 BCE.[2] As idealized by the Greeks,[3] pederasty was a relationship and bond – whether sexual or chaste – between an adolescent boy and an adult man outside of his immediate family. While most Greek men engaged in relations with both women and boys,[4] exceptions to the rule were known, some avoiding relations with women, and others rejecting relations with boys. In Rome, relations with boys took a more informal and less civic path, men either taking advantage of dominant social status to exact sexual favors from their social inferiors, or carrying on illicit relationships with freeborn boys.[5]

Analogous relations were documented among other ancient peoples, such as the Thracians,[6] the Celts and various Germanic peoples such as the Heruli and the Taifali.[7] According to Plutarch, the ancient Persians, too, had long practiced it, an opinion seconded by Sextus Empiricus who asserted that the laws of the Persians "recommended" the practice.[8] Herodotus, however, asserts they learned copulation with boys (παισὶ μίσγονται) from the Greeks,[9] by the use of that term reducing their practice to what John Addington Symonds describes as the "vicious form" of pederasty,[10] as opposed to the more restrained and cultured one valued by the Greeks.

Opposition to the carnal aspects of pederasty existed concurrently with the practice, both within and outside of the cultures in which it was found. Among the Greeks, a few cities prohibited it, and in others, such as Sparta, some claimed that only the chaste form of pederasty was permitted. Likewise, Plato's writings devalue and finally condemn sexual intercourse with the boys one loved, while glorifying the self-disciplined lover who abstained from consummating the relationship.[11]

The Judaeo-Christian faiths also condemned sodomy (while defining that term variously), a theme later promulgated by Islam and, later still, by the Baha'i Faith. Within the Baha'i faith pederasty is the only mention of any type of homosexuality by Baha'u'llah. "We shrink, for very shame, from treating of the subject of boys. Fear ye the Merciful, O peoples of the world! Commit not that which is forbidden you in Our Holy Tablet, and be not of those who rove distractedly in the wilderness of their desires."[12]

Within the blanket condemnation of sodomy in many faiths, pederasty in particular has been a target. The second century preacher Clement of Alexandria used divine pederasty as an indictment of Greek religion: "For your gods did not abstain even from boys. One loved Hylas, another Hyacinthus, another Pelops, another Chrysippus, another Ganymedes. These are the gods your wives are to worship!"[13] The early Christian Roman emperors quashed pederasty, together with the other overtly sexual manifestations of Greco-Roman religion and culture, as part of the imposition of Christianity as a state religion.[14] Early legal codes prescribed harsh penalties for violators. The law code of the Visigothic king Chindasuinth called for both partners [9] to be "emasculated without delay, and be delivered up to the bishop of the diocese where the deed was committed to be placed in solitary confinement in a prison." [10][11] These punishments were often linked to the penance given after the Sacrament of Confession. At Rome, the punishment was burning at the stake since the time of Theodosius I (390). Nonetheless the practice continued to surface, giving rise to proverbs such as With wine and boys around, the monks have no need of the Devil to tempt them, an early Christian saying from the Middle East.[15]

en.wikipedia.org...




posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by EricD
So, what are your thoughts on Catholicism?




It doesn't present how someone is or can be saved correctly and as such people are deceived and find themselves in hell the moment after they die. (As a sidenote since the catholic church teaches 99.99999% of catholics go to purgatory first, i wonder if people in hell are deceived into thinking it is purgatory, and not hell they are in.)

The real christian church started with the thief on the cross who was on the right side of Jesus, and expressed faith in Christ, then grew in the Book of Acts with an additional 120, see below

Acts 1:[13] And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
[14] These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
[15] And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)

and

Acts.2
[1] And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
[2] And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
[3] And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
[4] And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.


As time went by untrue christians/unsaved/unbelievers entered the church and perverted the truth of salvation by unsound doctrine and the introduction of paganistic practices with a supposed christian spin on them.

The Bible in the Book of James tells us this started at the beginning even in the Apostles day, but became full force in the 3rd, 4th and 5th centuries. The catholic church got it's name then and supressed the truth of the gospel.

Then we have the Dark Ages with a supressed truth of the Bible, and continued inflitration of paganistic practices into what is believed to be the true christian church.

Then the 1500's come. Several men and probably women came to the truth of the bible and what it says about salvation and stood up to the catholic heirarchy and thus the reformation.

It was also during the early centuries and especially the Dark ages that the doctrine of the rapture before the tribulation was also lost. Then After the Reformation true Bible scholars began to rediscover the doctrine of the rapture.

This is why it is considered to be a "new" thing. It was lost and only recently( I have traced the rediscovery of the rapture back to the 1700's, it could be earlier then that, but I have only found it linked to a man in the 1700's so far) rediscovered.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I don't know about a "beef", but anyone interested in the subject should read the book (which is free) called "The Beast The Dragon and The Woman".

Jesus was crucified because he forgave the sins of people, which the Jews considered to be blasphemy. Only God can forgive sins, so Jesus being God was able forgive sin, but was still crucified for blasphemy. So who gave authority to Catholic Churches to forgive sin? And why should anyone confess to and then accept the pentance from a man. Even the angels (not fallen) would get pretty jumpy when someone would bow down to them.
So then there is the idea that the Pope is God on earth while God isn't here. If you don't believe that this is accurate, look it up on the catholic encylopedia. Regardless of what the followers believe to be thier religion, it is what it is. Maybe Catholics that don't believe the Pope to be God should find a new faith.
How can a group or church change the Ten Commandments? I'm sure someone will come up with some fantastic reason to remove the commandment about praying to idols, but that is really way too far. Who is that guy on the Catholic Cross anyway. Jesus was a Jew, right? You would think someone might have mentioined a blonde haired blue eyed Jew.
Praying to Mary is also a big thumbs down, along with any other saint. Read the Ten Commandments. No other God before the Lord. I probably won't repost to argue any of this, so if you're trying to tell me that praying to Mary isn't putting her before God than Who is it people pray to?
Drinking wine is another little stumble. Wine in the bible that was O.K. was grape Juice not alcahol. So, is a little alcahol O.K. How about a little stealing, or just a little pre-marital sex? Don't they even have a catholic wine called the blood of Christ?
Jesus said not to judge others by words but by thier actions. At some point it should get kinda complicated to justify straying so far from what the bible says.
This one I can't prove, so if you would like to argue it, please send me your conclusion. I would like to see it proven true or false. The hat that the Popes wear at when he becomes pope, maybe called the Dagon Hat? has writing in Latin that says "Man as God on earth, over the Heavens, the Earth and the underworld". Underworld? Man as God on earth?
The Crusades were pretty bad. Did the Catholics really kill more Jews than Arabs?
How about the Bishop that just annouced that we should call God Allah? Doesn't that fit into the prophecy of one of the beast powers from Revelations. Is Revelations still in the Catholic Bible. Why is it called the Catholic Bible.
The Pope announces that other Christian religions are fake or not true. Wow, thats a pretty pointed statement. I know, I know, it's a matter of interpratation.
Wasn't the pope in Hitlers era in league with him?

Where does all that money go? Oh, I forgot you didn't want to mention the sexual child abuse.
Who changed the Sabbath day from Saturday to Sunday?

Jesus said he did not come to do away with the law, but to fulfill it, so how come the Catholic Church has disregarded the Ten Commandments and changed the law. Is that Christ like or Anti Christ like.

I will check back and if anyone has any good arguement, I will respond.



posted on Aug, 18 2007 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Popeye,
that's what I was trying to get across! There are true Jesus-loving christians in the catholic church, but the bible says "come out of her my people that you be not partakers of her plagues". Don't depend on rituals and man! "Let God be true and every man a liar".



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by dbrandt


It doesn't present how someone is or can be saved correctly and as such people are deceived and find themselves in hell the moment after they die.



dbrandt,

Hello and thanks for posting! Can you please let me know what you consider that truth about salvation and how that differs from Catholic teaching?

Thank you,

Eric



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Popeye,

I'll try to whittle my quoting of your post a bit, as it was quite long. I'm a little confused as you said that you wouldn't reply and then later said that you would, but either way I appreciate your posting.

I know that some of your questions were rhetorical, but I'll try to answer them anyway.

My replies are in the original quote, preceded by a '**'


Originally posted by popeye0314
I don't know about a "beef", but anyone interested in the subject should read the book (which is free) called "The Beast The Dragon and The Woman".

** I will check it out. Thanks.
___________
Jesus was crucified because he forgave the sins of people, which the Jews considered to be blasphemy. Only God can forgive sins, so Jesus being God was able forgive sin, but was still crucified for blasphemy. So who gave authority to Catholic Churches to forgive sin?

**Jesus.
________
And why should anyone confess to and then accept the pentance from a man. Even the angels (not fallen) would get pretty jumpy when someone would bow down to them.

**A quote not from me (don't want to take undo credit):
God had sent Jesus to forgive sins, but after his resurrection Jesus told the apostles, "‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’" (John 20:21–23). (This is one of only two times we are told that God breathed on man, the other being in Genesis 2:7, when he made man a living soul. It emphasizes how important the establishment of the sacrament of penance was.)
________

So then there is the idea that the Pope is God on earth while God isn't here. If you don't believe that this is accurate, look it up on the catholic encylopedia. Regardless of what the followers believe to be thier religion, it is what it is. Maybe Catholics that don't believe the Pope to be God should find a new faith.

** I can’t find that in the Catholic Encyclopedia. I don’t think that you can either. Can you please provide a quote?
____

How can a group or church change the Ten Commandments? I'm sure someone will come up with some fantastic reason to remove the commandment about praying to idols, but that is really way too far.

**That is a very legitimate point of contention and your interpretation is certainly valid.
____
Who is that guy on the Catholic Cross anyway. Jesus was a Jew, right? You would think someone might have mentioined a blonde haired blue eyed Jew.

**Uhhhh, you don’t think that Christ being Nordic is Catholic teaching, do you?
____

Praying to Mary is also a big thumbs down, along with any other saint. Read the Ten Commandments. No other God before the Lord. I probably won't repost to argue any of this, so if you're trying to tell me that praying to Mary isn't putting her before God than Who is it people pray to?

**No Catholic is putting any Saint or Mary before God. If anything, they are asking for their intercession with God.
____
Drinking wine is another little stumble. Wine in the bible that was O.K. was grape Juice not alcahol. So, is a little alcahol O.K. How about a little stealing, or just a little pre-marital sex? Don't they even have a catholic wine called the blood of Christ?
** I’m sorry, I’m not following you here at all. I’m not being facetious, I really don’t understand what your trying to say.
________
Jesus said not to judge others by words but by thier actions. At some point it should get kinda complicated to justify straying so far from what the bible says.

**That might be true if you agree that Catholics were straying from the Bible.
_____
Cont'd in next post

Eric

[edit on 19-8-2007 by EricD]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join