The Catholic religion blatantly defies God and his teachings. leads its members to perdition...why?

reply to post by icybreeze
Hi Icybreeze, first of all, I'd like to commend you on your candor. If more individuals were searching spiritually as you are, it would make my vocation so much easier! You claim that you never got the answers to the questions you raised. Maybe you just weren't looking in the right place. I hope I can be of service until you find the source. I base my answers on the only true source of wisdom and knowledge, the word of God, the Bible. So feel free to look up the scriptural quotations for insight.
#1 - Jesus never was quoted as calling his adopted father, Joseph, by the title "Father". But, Jesus did consider Joseph his parent. (Luke 2:27) The question of calling someone "Father" has two implications. One of fleshly procreation and one of spiritual adoption (Romans 8:15, 16). Jesus of course, was not Joseph's flesh and blood, but it is almost a given that Joseph adopted him as his own son to spare Mary the humiliation of possibly bearing a "believed" bastard child. Of course, the situation was totally different in that Jesus was conceived by holy spirit from the "Heavenly Father". Being free of sin, screened of in the belly of his mother, Mary, he could quite assertively call Almighty God, his "Abba, Father", just as all holy ones (saints) can do the same. (I for one, not being a "saint", prefer to call him by his given Name, Jehovah. (Psalms 83:18; Isaiah 42:8 KJV)
#2 Praying words verbatim or memorized phrases in is not the way Almighty God expects to be talked to. If you were a father, would you not want to hear words expressed from your child's heart or would you want something that someone told them to memorize and repeat? Anyway, Jesus counseled against haughty prayers by rote at Matthew 6:7, 9-13. As for the so called "Lord's Prayer" , this was just an outline in the order of importance of the subjects you were to pray about to your heavenly Father. Verses 9 & 10 was concerning the sanctification or "making holy" of God's unique Name. Isn't it strange that many theologians have completely removed the Divine Name from their Bible translations? I doubt they are fulfilling the command at Matt. 6:9. The second thing in order of importance to pray for is sustenance. Even God knows you need this! But is of lesser importance than the prior issue. The next issue is of how indebted we are to God for the errors we all make on a daily basis. We are all imperfect, sinful creatures and we deserve death for our daily sins against God. But, we actually have two helpers, Jesus Christ and holy spirit. Jesus is our intercessor before the Father, pleading on our behalf as long as we pray in his name (John 14:13, 14). Then he can give us spiritual assistance (John 14:16, 17). We need this to be able to forgive the many injustices that are thrown at us on a daily basis as Christians. Lastly, saving our own neck! There is nothing wrong with pleading to the Father to help us steer clear of trouble, he wants us to overcome our imperfections and sins. And only He can make the way out or at least help us to endure it when adversity is at our door! (1 Cor. 10:13)
#3 This is an outright lie. Who would expect a bridegroom to remain celibate all of his married life except the Catholics!? Of course Joseph had children with Mary. (Mat. 13:54-56)
#4 Another outright falsehood. This is to perpetuate the Mediatrix myth. This myth was started by the Catholic Church because the Bible says there is an "intercessor" or "mediator" needed between Almighty God and sinful man. Since to the Catholics, Jesus is Almighty God, Mary, his mother became the go-between, a blatant corruption of truth. (1 Tim. 2:5)
#5 You are partially correct. Not everyone is to partake of the communion meal. Only those who are to rule with Christ in Heaven as kings and priests can partake (i.e. holy ones or "saints") (Mark 3:29; 1 Cor. 11:27)
I hope this helps. Minstrel

reply to post by EricD


O.k. I'll rephrase that: Too bad they will most probably never realize that she is dead, "assumed into Heaven" (PRAYER TO OUR LADY, ASSUMED INTO HEAVEN - www.catholic.org...) and now Living happily ever after. Jesus says He is the one through which Man goes to the Father; I do not recall the bit where He said to request His mother to intercede unto Him. It is nowhere.

Why make more trouble than it is worth, counting beads and "White knuckling the Rosary" (a great song by Tourniquet - though rather harsh in its accuracy on portraying the "average Christian") and wasting breath to request intercession from a physically dead ex-woman, instead of going directly to the Living Father by His Living Son? Seems a lot of wasted effort, that!

[edit on 10-11-2007 by J.Smit]

DefCon, regarding your extensive and well-worked rebuttal of the material that I and FlyersFan have posted... you need not have gone to such lengths as the essential difference between your POV and ours is that you work from the assumption that the deceased are "dead good and proper". i.e. they are unable to be aware of anything whatsoever. Presumably you operate in a tradition which asserts that all the dead will sleep until the final judgement?

FlyersFan and myself are asserting a different tradition, which holds that those who are deceased in Christ are now alive in him. They are thus not some sort of sleeping spirit being, but are very much alive and in communion (small "c") with all the church in all time, through the fact that all are in Christ.

I doubt you are interested, and willing, but you can read about this idea of "Particular Judgement" here - section B deals with scriptural sources, and section E might be particularly relevant in showing that the RCC is quite happy to say that it does not presume to have all the answers and that scripture is not a book of answers to all mankind's questions - as opposed to the General Judgement here. I expect you will just say it is nonsense, but at least see that your own version (i.e. that the deceased in christ are dead totally) is at least as subject to personal belief-structure and presumtpion, and is in no way more self-evident.

As a side question, if you assert the Creed (do you?), how do you respond to the point made which derives from Ephesians 4:9 and more explicitly 1 Peter 3:18-20:

...for instance, in that of the descent of Christ into Limbo, an article of the Creed which loses all significance unless it be admitted that the saints of the Old Testament were thereby liberated from this temporal penalty of loss and admitted to the vision of God.

Anyway, would be interested if you could, instead of asserting your belief in deadness, that you could instead turn to the arguments offered in favour of particular judgement.

With best wishes.

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by SouthernBelle82
Do you know why some churches don't offer the cup? I find that interesting.

Because they believe in transubstantiation and its too dangerious to allow a commoner to drink as they may spill some of it.

Although Catholics do believe in transubstantiation, the reason that you give has nothing to do with anything. I don't know why churches don't offer the cup to everyone. When I have gone to the "old school" Latin masses, the cup was not offered to anyone, and only the priest drank from it. At all of the new masses that I have been to, it is available to everyone, but I have never taken it. I just don't want to drink after that many strangers.

I personally don't believe in transubstantiation... nice symbolism and all, but to me, that's all it is.

reply to post by Eddy_P


Rome and Greek could be put together,as they are one and the same,they just have different names.
You could also put Judaism,Christianity and Islam together as they all stem from the same belief.
Phoenician beliefs are different than Babylonian and Carthaginian beliefs became a mixture of Phoenician,Numidian and local Berber tribes.
And then theres Celtic beliefs....


[edit on 10-11-2007 by jakyll]

reply to post by Minstrel

thank you for taking the time to explain your beliefs in these items.

Originally posted by d60944
FlyersFan and myself are asserting a different tradition, which holds that those who are deceased in Christ are now alive in him. They are thus not some sort of sleeping spirit being, but are very much alive and in communion (small "c") with all the church in all time, through the fact that all are in Christ.

The problem with this concept that you keep bringing up, is that it is clearly outside the realm of man to judge a persons heart. A person may lead the best and most saint-like life possible, yet never repent of their sin, and end up not being saved. For Catholics who follow both a Works and Grace based salvation schema, its even more complex as maybe the person was short sending in one boxtop. With this in mind neither you nor the church can guess with 100% accuracy as to who is alive in the after life with Christ, and who has gone elsewhere. To make matters even more complex, the Catholic Chruch believes in the construct of Purgatory, as was required to demand works on behalf of their departed relatives besides the works already done for themsleves. If someone is still in Purgatory they don't have direct access to either God or Christ to relay this intercession too. Purgatory conflicts with so many aspects of salvation, and as far as I can tell, the Roman Catholic Church stabbed themselves right in the foot as it does not jive with the concept of mediation by the dead.

Originally posted by d60944
you work from the assumption that the deceased are "dead good and proper". i.e. they are unable to be aware of anything whatsoever.
Presumably you operate in a tradition which asserts that all the dead will sleep until the final judgement?

I never said that they are unaware, as that seems to conflict with Christ’s parable about the man in Hell observing his son. What I have said though is that contact between the two sides is very clearly forbidden, which is also expressed in that parable. To make matters even more confusing is the whole aspect of “were do we go when we die”. This is an entire side topic all on its own, as the bible not only mentions several different scenarios, but it also includes conflicting ones. Some of this confusion may well be due to a shift in environment of the afterlife which occurred when Christ descended into “hell” (I’m just going to refer to it as hell for simplicity sake), to break the bonds of those who had died before him and bring them along to paradise (I’ll stick with paradise as that is the word used with the thief on the cross). Heaven and hell are not supposed to exist in their final form until after the great judgment, so is it proper to assume that when we die that we go to either of these locations.

Now obviously the rules on this are different for those who are either non-human or non-dead religious entities (for lack of a better description). By that I mean angles, people who were assumed into heaven, Christ, the elders (which may be a personification of the books of the New testament), and the four creatures (possibly a personification of the four gospels). Here we are getting into highly speculative areas of the topic, as the points on this particular subject are just not made exceptionally clear, and Revelations confuses them more then the whole rest of the Bible all by itself. Perhaps the most important factor with Revelations is that it was in fact a non-literal vision of prophecy, and the same holds true for his visions of the throne room. Obviously there are not going to be literal seven headed beasts roaming the world like Godzilla, so with that same process of thought his description of the throne room itself is more then likely symbolic.

Originally posted by d60944
"Particular Judgement" here - section B deals with scriptural sources, and section E might be particularly relevant in showing that the RCC is quite happy to say that it does not presume to have all the answers and that scripture is not a book of answers to all mankind's questions - as opposed to the General Judgement here.

The second link is not functioning, but I will read them once I finish this post and you correct the linking issue.

Originally posted by d60944
As a side question, if you assert the Creed (do you?), how do you respond to the point made which derives from Ephesians 4:9 and more explicitly 1 Peter 3:18-20:

The Nicene creed, yes we do.

Eph 4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
1Pe 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

I have already mentioned this point twice in this thread, once already in this post, and in flyers post were she mentioned Mat 27:52.

As I already stated, the topic of “where we go when we die before judgment” could have an entire thread all to itself, but the ultimate answer is “we don’t know”. The Pseudepigraphal book of Enoch mentions three holding areas, one for the saved, one for the damned, and one for martyrs. The bible itself mentions Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, Tartarus, The Pit, The Abyss, The Lake of Fire, Heaven, and Paradise . Either way though, Christ descended into one of the lower locations were he freed the faithful who had been imprisoned there by breaking the bonds of death. Up to the time of Christ’s death no one was allowed to go into paradise, because the wages of sin had not been sufficiently paid off, and grace reestablished. So they did sit in some location, whether it be a place of suffering or just the grave, up to that point. This goes along with the quote by Flyers about how several saints were raised from the dead for a short period to tell the story of what had happened when Christ broke those bonds. Those stories did not make it into the actual Bible though beyond the slight mention of two gospels. To read the more complete telling of those stories you have to read “The Acts of Pontius Pilate”, or “Gospel of Nicodemus”, which is the only place, I know of, that those stories are expounded upon. Again though this is a pseudepigraphal work, and does not hold the same authority as true scripture:

Nevertheless it is more marvelous that he rose not alone from the dead, but did raise up alive many other dead out of their sepulchres, and they have been seen of many in Jerusalem.
[skipping some]
Now when we were set together with all our fathers in the deep, in obscurity of darkness, on a sudden there came a golden heat of the sun and a purple and royal light shining upon us. And immediately the father of the whole race of men, together with all the patriarchs and prophets, rejoiced, saying: This light is the beginning (author) of everlasting light which did promise to send unto us his co-eternal light. And Esaias cried out and said: This is the light of the Father, even the Son of God, according as I prophesied when I lived upon the earth: The land of Zabulon and the land of Nephthalim beyond Jordan, of Galilee of the Gentiles, the people that walked in darkness have seen a great light, and they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them did the light shine. And now hath it come and shone upon us that sit in death.
[skipping some more]
1 And as Satan the prince, and Hell, spoke this together, suddenly there came a voice as of thunder and a spiritual cry: Remove, O princes, your gates, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in. When Hell heard that he said unto Satan the prince: Depart from me and go out of mine abode: if thou be a mighty man of war, fight thou against the King of glory. But what hast thou to do with him? And Hell cast Satan forth out of his dwelling. Then said Hell unto his wicked ministers: Shut ye the hard gates of brass and put on them the bars of iron and withstand stoutly, lest we that hold captivity be taken captive.
2 But when all the multitude of the saints heard it, they spake with a voice of rebuking unto Hell: Open thy gates, that the King of glory may come in. And David cried out, saying: Did I not when I was alive upon earth, foretell unto you: Let them give thanks unto the Lord, even his mercies and his wonders unto the children of men; who hath broken the gates of brass and smitten the bars of iron in sunder? he hath taken them out of the way of their iniquity. And thereafter in like manner Esaias said: Did not I when I was alive upon earth foretell unto you: The dead shall arise, and they that are in the tombs shall rise again, and they that are in the earth shall rejoice, for the dew which cometh of the Lord is their healing? And again I said: O death, where is thy sting? O Hell, where is thy victory?
[again]
Then Hell, receiving Satan the prince, with sore reproach said unto him: O prince of perdition and chief of destruction, Beelzebub, the scorn of the angels and spitting of the righteous why wouldest thou do this? Thou wouldest crucify the King of glory and at his decease didst promise us great spoils of his death: like a fool thou knewest not what thou didst. For behold now, this Jesus putteth to flight by the brightness of his majesty all the darkness of death, and hath broken the strong depths of the prisons, and let out the prisoners and loosed them that were bound

So again, were do we sit between the time of death and the time of Judgment when Heaven is to descend upon the earth, the dead raise from their graves, and the great lake of fire is created?

I don’t know for a certain fact, and nether does the Church.
Hopefully the paradise that Christ speaks about, maybe the grave, but I doubt their constructed version of Purgitory.

[edit on 11/10/2007 by defcon5]

reply to post by cloakndagger


I believe you've very tactfully said it all.

I try to respect anyone's faith and beliefs knowing it is an extremely personal issue, but my heart truly goes out to the many, many children molested by such a large number of priests over such a long period of time. I don't need anyone or anything to tell me that is so horroribly wrong.

Has anyone seen the documentary "Face of Evil" I believe it is called?

Personally, I couldn't bare to watch it!

Originally posted by defcon5 in reference to
Revelations 17:10-12
"17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space."

Chronological Summary
"Seven kings" = 7 religious faiths of the Mediterranean region from a 5000 BCE to 95 CE religious perspective.
"Five have fallen" (ie. been superseded) = 1-5.
"One is" = 6.
"Other not yet come" = 7.
The "eighth" = 8. The "ten horns (kings)" = - -.

1) Babylonian gods
2) Egypt gods
3) Judaism
4) Greek Mythical gods
5) Roman Mythical gods
6) [B](Roman) Christianity[/B]
7) Islam
- - Waldensian, Lutherans, Anglicans, Episcopalians, Presbyterians,
- - Quakers, Baptists, Congregationalists, Mennonites, Methodists.
8) Mormonism

defcon5’s comment was…
This is an interesting concept from the first glance, but I am not really sure I understand it fully. My biggest question is what exactly are the ten kings supposed to do?

The “Ten Kings” to which John refers in Revelations 17:10-12 pertain to prior, existing, and future Religious Kingdoms (ie. religious faiths) told to John by the angelic time travelling messenger (aka. Angel).
It is part of the NT warning about the false religion spoken of in Daniel 7:23, 25 and further explained and identified in Rev 13:18.

Originally posted by icybreeze
4.They tell you to pray to the Virgin Mary and through her you will reach God's ear.

So they ADMIT God does not hear all?
I am deeply spiritual, but will never follow ANY religion, precisely for this reason.
The Creator I speak to is everywhere, and hears me wherever I am. Even, believe it or not, 40 metres underwater (I am a scuba diver).
God does not hear you unless through a translator? God can not hear you unless you attend a "church"? This is corruption at the highest and most obvious level. Designed so a few can control people, through a "fear" of God.
This religion can ONLY be the work of the Great Trickster himself.

reply to post by EricD


Maybe you should read a little bit about William Tyndale, burned at the stake for translating the bible into english and smuggling them to the "common man" in England.

en.wikipedia.org...

If God is omnipresent, why pray to Mary or some saint, ghost, or other...thing? Why must there be a proxy between God and a person? Is Mary somehow more qualified to act as a messenger with some prayers and take them to God? And if so, why is she more worthy than you or I? If all people were created equal by God, shouldn't that make each of us equally worthy of communicating directly to God? If the goal is a personal relationship, why not keep it between you and God?

The problem I see with Catholicism, and most other Christian-based religions, is that a LOT of man-made junk has been thrown into their belief system.

Would Christ give a thumbs up to the attire that priests, cardinals, the pope, and other ranking Catholic clergy wear? And why must a person wear their "Sunday Best" to church? Does God really look upon Jane Doe and remark, "Wow, she looks beautiful in that lovely dress today." No, God looks at the heart, not the way people look.

What about the lavish churches (which are not at all exclusive to the Catholic church) that have been built in order to spread the word of humility and poverty? What about the Vatican and it's wealth, which is speculated by some to be more than any country in the world?

And how would Christ look upon the Catholic church's apparent self-appointed authority to determine the spiritual fate of infants who die without being baptized? Who gave the papacy the authority to say if a person is saved or not? This is for God alone to decide, is it not?

Who gave priests the authority to absolve a person of their sins? Or tell them to say certain prayers in order to do so? Doesn't forgiveness come only from Christ? Why must any prayer other than, "God, please forgive me for the sins I committed," be necessary to find forgiveness?

Do you honestly believe that if Christ were to stop by the year 2007, he'd sit through a large Catholic mass and afterwards think to himself, "Wow, these folks really got it right!" I don't think so.

[edit on 11-11-2007 by John_Q_Llama]

Originally posted by PennKen2009
reply to post by icybreeze

 

2. Praying with repetetive words (rosary beads)

And this is wrong why? Hindus pray to their deities by repeating words through meditation, singing a hymn in any church, the chorus is a group of repetitive words. And do you even know the words on the rosary, its not just words, its meditating and reflecting on the lessons and events that take place in the Gospels of the New Testament during the times of Christ's life.

Answered from the bible in Mathew 6:7-8

7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words. 8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.

4.They tell you to pray to the Virgin Mary and through her you will reach God's ear.

When we pray to Mary or any of the saints and angels, we are not worshiping them as the Creator or father of all, I'm tired of people saying that praying to saints and all is wrong. We are NOT worshiping them. We are asking them, who are before the throne of God to ask the Almighty God to listen to our prayers and bless us who are on Earth. We do not worship them as if they are idols in ancient Rome or Greece, to punish enemies or anything like that. Like I said, we are praying to them to please remember us when they pray to God in Heaven.

For this I Peter 3:12 has an Answer

12 For the eyes of the LORD are on the righteous,
And His ears are open to their prayers;
But the face of the LORD is against those who do evil.


Also Mathew 6:8

8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.

God really doesn't need a spiritual hearing aid for your prayers, talk to him hes already told you he is listening.

The Catholic church has done a lot of things wrong, and they continue to do so. Some people claim that "Ash Wednesday, where they put ash on your forehead, is so that when the Beast comes to earth and requires you to get a mark on your right palm or forehead that you'll be more willing. Also, there are upside down crosses on the Pope's chair and many churches.



They also say the only way to be forgiven is to go to a priest and confess, when they are not the ones forgiving. In fact, they have a system of heiarchy, putting some people in positions with more authority than others, such as the claim that the Pope is the closest to God when God views us all on the same level. They also pray to Mary, when they should be praying to Jesus. And for baptism, they just sprinkle water on the baby's head, when there are two things wrong with that. First, baptism is when you are reborn, and you have to want to be baptised, how can a baby do that? Next, sprinkling; Jesus was submerged, and he came to earth as an example of what every man should be, therefore you have to be submerged.

Originally posted by icybreeze
why ask her to pray for you when you can pray yourself? that is the problem with the Catholic religion. they have put all these other middlemen that youu pray to so that they relay the message. it is not how God planned it.

Wrong.

1 - It's not a 'catholic thing'. It's a CHRISTIAN thing. ALL Christians are called upon to pray for each other. We ALL intercess for others when we pray for them. I have yet to see a Christian denomination that doesn't call for their congregations to pray for people. To intercede for others to God.

2 - It most definately IS what God planned. Read the scripture quotes. There are MANY more. God WANTS us to ask each other to pray for us. God EXPECTS us to pray for each other. That's intercession.

Originally posted by EricD
I think that this is a legitimate thread

BTS is littered with all this stuff. The same anti-catholic topics over and over. They (predictably) get lapped up by the misinformed anti-Catholic crew each time. It's my understanding that the scripture spitting contests and personal interpretations are supposed to be in the BTS religion forum.

Originally posted by J.Smit
for that alone negates Mary's power of forgiving sins.

The Catholic Church does NOT believe that Mary forgives sins in any manner different than you or I forgive sins.

Originally posted by defcon5
Non-Canonical…

Oh that's funny. Martin Luther didn't like the fact that the bible didn't support his interpretation so he tossed out books and ripped apart others. The ENTIRE bible is the Word of God. Not just the parts that Martin Luther liked.

you and your Catholic Apologists showed up to ruin things

... showed up to correct your (usual) errors.

with your spamming of mostly off topic bible verses.

ALL were completely on topic as I showed.
Your interpretation is different and your complaint of 'spam' is

But that is of course your agenda here, isn’t it.

Discussion isn't agenda. :shk:
I'll be sure to add you to my prayers tonight.
YES .. I'll INTERCEDE for you to God.
It's what we are supposed to do.

reply to post by NuclearPaul

God can not hear you unless you attend a "church"? This is corruption at the highest and most obvious level. Designed so a few can control people, through a "fear" of God.

Thats not really the Catholic belief.Yes,it is a religion all about control,but holy/sacred places have always been built.It is a place of focus and a place to keep the rain off ya head,it does not mean God can only here you there and no place else!

Originally posted by vashts121
Some people claim that "Ash Wednesday, where they put ash on your forehead, is so that when the Beast comes to earth ...

That is the most bizarre anti-Catholic comment I have ever seen. And I have seen plenty of uneducated anti-Catholic comments. I have no idea where you heard this. Jack Chick perhaps?? :shk:

They also say the only way to be forgiven is to go to a priest and confess,

The Catholic church does NOT say that the 'only' way to be forgiven is to go to confession. Confession is a sacrament and it is special (and very helpful because their is usually a discussion with the priest about how to avoid those particular sins) but it is NOT the only way to receive forgiveness. Read the catechism.

the Pope is the closest to God when God views us all on the same level.

The Catholic Church does NOT say the Pope is more loved than anyone else. Called to a special vocation ("many are called, few are chosen")- yes. More loved? No.

They also pray to Mary, when they should be praying to Jesus.

Already addressed. Did you read the thread?

And for baptism, ..

1 - Scripture specifically states that ENTIRE FAMILIES went to be baptised by John the Baptister. Entire families. That would include children.

2 - Submerged? Guess what - on the river Jordon where John did his baptising was only knee deep. If you look at the early churches from the first few centuries the baptismal pools were only deep enough for people to kneel in. They had the water poured over their heads - usually from a shell.

God isn't going to say that a baptism isn't legitimate and the person is going to Hell because they had water poured over their heads vs them being submerged. Oh .. and if you want to get all techinical ... the water in the Jordan River was RUNNING and therefore being submerged doesn't fulfill the requirement to have running water (to wash away sins) and therefore being submerged in a baptismal pool or a pond would be a big no-no.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Wrong.

1 - It's not a 'catholic thing'. It's a CHRISTIAN thing. ALL Christians are called upon to pray for each other. We ALL intercess for others when we pray for them. I have yet to see a Christian denomination that doesn't call for their congregations to pray for people. To intercede for others to God.

2 - It most definately IS what God planned. Read the scripture quotes. There are MANY more. God WANTS us to ask each other to pray for us. God EXPECTS us to pray for each other. That's intercession.

FlyersFan, I think you misunderstood. What he meant is that a person shouldn't have to pray TO another person, such as Mary or a saint. Prayer should be between God and an individual. No middle person.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Oh that's funny. Martin Luther didn't like the fact that the bible didn't support his interpretation so he tossed out books and ripped apart others. The ENTIRE bible is the Word of God. Not just the parts that Martin Luther liked.

The Germanic Luther Bible is still available, I suggest you get a copy and see for yourself that this is not true. Maybe you should start studying real history instead of Catholic Propaganda…

Luther Bible
Initially Luther had a low view of the books of Esther, Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. He called the Epistle of James "an epistle of straw," finding little in it that pointed to Christ and His saving work. He also had harsh words for the book of Revelation, saying that he could "in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it."[3] He had reason to question the apostolicity of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation because the early church categorized these books as antilegomena, meaning that they were not accepted without reservation as canonical. Luther did not, however, remove them from his editions of the Scriptures. His views on some of these books changed in later years.
Luther chose to place in the Apocrypha, an inter-testamental section of his bible, those portions of the Old Testament found in the Greek Septuagint but not in the Hebrew Masoretic text. These were included in his earliest translation, but were later set aside as "good to read" but not as the inspired Word of God. The setting aside (or simple exclusion) of these texts from Bibles was eventually adopted by nearly all Protestants.

Catholic Propaganda does not even admit the historically accurate fact that Luther’s original fight was over their selling of Indulgences. You should have seen the argument that I started over that one with a Nun in her religion class, which I was forced to take in Catholic High School. She was rather shocked by what she found out, and had never heard the real reason for the Protestant Reformation. Needless to say, shortly after that, those of us who were non-catholic students were no longer forced to attend their religion classes or Masses.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
... showed up to correct your (usual) errors.

You have yet to correct me on a single thing in all the threads we have had this argument in.

Believe me, if the entire hierarchy of the learned Roman Catholic Church was unable to prove any of Martin Luther’s criticisms unfounded, you are certainly not going to prove otherwise in any of these threads. Rome wanted nothing more in all its years then to put Martin Luther to death as quickly and quietly as possible to shut him up. The reason why is because what he was saying was true, and showed the abuses of the church, as proved through the scripture to the common man. Up to that point Rome had used its control over the Bible and its interpretation to wield control over all of Christendom. However, your normal MO is to begin to attack the man, based on Catholic propaganda of the time, and not his message….
Just as you did above!

Originally posted by FlyersFan
ALL were completely on topic as I showed.
Your interpretation is different and your complaint of 'spam' is

Just to name one…
Please show me how Mat 22:20 is on topic?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Dead who stand before God are aware of our situations: Matthew 22:20, Luke 15:10; 1 Cor 4:9; Hebrews 12:1.

Mat 22:19 Show me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

It looks like its about the image of Ceasar being on the money to me, I don’t see anything abut the dead standing before God here.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Discussion isn't agenda.

No, discussion is not, but that is not what you normally do.
I can show you repeatedly in these threads were you start lobbying both in the thread, and I am sure through the complaint button, that these threads should be relegated to BTS were they are quickly lost and forgotten. A very similar tactic to the one which used to be frequently used by masons in the Secret Societies forum. One of our first arguments on this topic you started spamming lists of bible verses until everyone quit the thread and it died.
Are you going to admit these things happened, or make me dig through BTS for the actual threads (that is if they did not get trashed)?


[edit on 11/11/2007 by defcon5]

Originally posted by icybreeze
yes but the intention of the OP was to question why the Catholic religion knowingly does opposite of what the bible says..not mere interpretations but blatant acts. please see the examples i listed in the OP. when Jesus says no one can reach the Father but through me, he means just that. or call no one else "father" and the priest wants us to call him father..?

Well you need to go to the right sites if you want any answers to your questions. Everyone has their own opinion and considering you went to a catholic school and all you should have most of the answers - is that not so? It's part of the teachings when you are at a Catholic school as to why this and that is done.

I don't think you are looking for answers as to why Catholics do certain things but you ARE looking to find what else people will come up with to bash Catholicism. Unfortunately you will get a point for this post but if you do a search there and MANY threads where you could go to further bash Catholicism or ask questions.