Are Catholics Christian?

reply to post by Rockpuck

.. but don't judge others for not hearing the same words you have.. because regardless of dogma, religions, faiths....

I never say that individual Catholics are necessarily not Christian.
What I am saying is that a State created a religious institution, called the Catholic Church.
There was a bureaucracy already established, with a hierarchy, to operate a State religion.
Once an Emperor commands that the institution come into being, wheels go into motion (if they do not, heads will roll).
The simple way to get it done is just take the existing infrastructure and shift the name from the Church of Paganism to the Church of Jesus.
If you want to call it the Christian Church, have a good time.
I choose not to.
On the local level, the authentic catholic church continued on with its life.
The institution with the copyrighted trademark of The Catholic Church gradually increased its holding sway over the authentic church.
I recognize the church and the kingdom of God that is in the hearts of the believers.

Catholic is practically anti-Christian. When Jesus died, it was many years after the cross, and his wife Mary had a gospel of her own. Society was such that only men could administer, Mary of Magdelain had an honour of her own. When the Romans made it their religion after many years of persecution, they got rid of women's equality, the Roman Emperor became Pope, and finally they destroyed the Greek philosophical schools.
The idea that herbs were destroyed by the Catholic church in England is an unfortunate fault of no one. The herbs were pagan, but in Britain there was little Spanish Inquisition and monastaries took over the duties. Then Henry VIII shut them down, and much was lost.....

reply to post by Rockpuck

Originally posted by Rockpuck
It would be obvious to any half witted man that a religion outlawed could not practice in the open. No churches for Christ. Where did they go? Sewers. Catacombs. Dungeons..

Where did I say they didn’t practice their religion in Catacombs? Where? You’re trying to prove how intelligent you are by attacking something I never said. That just shows me you are 1) Not really reading the post or 2) Not comprehending it. The former shows apathy the latter shows ignorance. Which defense do you claim?

www.scrollpublishing.com...

Originally posted by Rockpuck
While this study does not intend on Christianity in general, notice how women are drawn into the walls inside the Catacombs..

Yes I do notice. I also notice that this post is about Women’s Fashions! That’s your proof that Paul didn’t exist and women actually founded the Catholic Church? MY God , how your instructors must have loved your research papers! This is amazing! I can only bow to the intellect of someone who can extrapolate a whole revisionist history of Christianity from a picture of a head-scarf. True genius.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
A simple Google search will give you plenty of books to read.. I have several on the topic in my own library.

Sorry, I’m not that interested in ‘Fashionable Head Coverings of 1450‘.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
No no, with your intelligence it would take something ignorant and moronic for you to follow...

Nothing like putting words into other people’s mouths in order to win the argument or giving useless information that has no bearing on the subject. I guess that’s what makes you so intelligent.



P.S. The other link was dead.

P.P.S. You certainly do give off that odor I talked about. Now I’m sure of it.

Originally posted by passenger

Yes I do notice. I also notice that this post is about Women’s Fashions! That’s your proof that Paul didn’t exist and women actually founded the Catholic Church?

Passenger,,when he said that about Paul and the thing about woman,, didn't a light bulb go on in your head that you are not talking to the sharpest knife in the drawer?

The guys a terminally self righteuous narcisisst, don't even waste your time. He has his lil mind made up and he doesn't want to be confused with the facts.

Besides he is much more edumacated

" Originally posted by Rockpuck
A simple Google search will give you plenty of books to read.. I have several on the topic in my own library."


I never liked Seuss's books

- Con



[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

reply to post by Conspiriology

Originally posted by Conspiriology
The guys a terminally self righteuous narcisisst, don't even waste your time. He has his lil mind made up and he doesn't want to be confused with the facts.

Quite right. The issue of using prefixes set an alarm off too. Such a self-professed ‘Master’ of linguistics should know that a great portion of English words are created, used and related through the use of prefixes and suffixes. Your nom de plume is a manifest example of that. I was going to argue it out, but figured you‘d get around to it sooner or later, as it was your fight.

That being said, I would like to see this thread get back on track. Apologies to the OP for that bit of nonsense I fell into. And in that Spirit, I feel I will have to refrain from responding to any of Rockpuck’s posts made henceforth.

Con, you’ve made some good points here and MikeboydUS and others have made some really good contributions. I’d like to see more of those and get on with this…

reply to post by Conspiriology

woman,, didn't

Is this a kind of homage to Rockpuck, with the ,,, ?
What is that, anyway?
Is it a way to show how big of a breath he takes before he resumes talking?
Does he have a dictaphone that his assistant types in, for him?

Originally posted by passenger

That being said, I would like to see this thread get back on track. Apologies to the OP for that bit of nonsense I fell into.

Not a problem. i have just been watching this progress and it has been an interesting diversion.

Con, you’ve made some good points here and MikeboydUS and others have made some really good contributions. I’d like to see more of those and get on with this…

Here Here!!!

Rockpuck,
I am not suggesting you pull you head in, but I agree with Conspiriology in that something in this thread has you a little out of character. In some instances you seem to be arguing with people making the same points as you....??

St Udio,

what did you milk this topic for?? 9 or 10 pages ? SheeZe !!!

For the record I was asking what I thought was a relatively straight forward question. I had no idea this would eventuate....
(He says on page eleven )

Anyway. as I said before. Dont mind me. Alot of this is out of my league (Note to some posters, it is not a sin to admit it sometimes) but I do appreciate the education.

P.S. Mike, Thank for the clarification on Origin and Nature

[edit on 8/7/2008 by VIKINGANT]

reply to post by Conspiriology


Wiki?

Lol..

I gave you the root words, your lack of comprehension is your own loss.

Look them up for your self, I am quite certain my Latin does not fail me.

jmdewey60:

I never say that individual Catholics are necessarily not Christian

Well thats amusing.. the people are Christian but their religion is not?

passenger

Which defense do you claim?

Neither .. your posts assumed I was "making it up" ... in which I show you that evidence is readily available .. even if God forbid you have to dissect other subjects to get to the root cause..

That’s your proof that Paul didn’t exist and women actually founded the Catholic Church?

I have none. That is to say, no one has any. Just as there is no actual evidence that any of the apostles lived.. they did not "found" the religion, that much we know.. because the religion it's self carried far to many aspects of Romanism while broadening in Rome.. it is only apparent that Slaves or an underclass in Rome flourished with the religion in the underground.. Christianity was a Cult.. so it acted as such.

MY God , how your instructors must have loved your research papers!

Yes they did, mostly because instead of regurgitating another persons work I made my own.

True genius.

I know. Because Rome was a Patriarch there was not so much regard for "average" women. Yes they relished in the idea of sex and the feminine .. they didn't paint them on walls or in their house or even in their houses of worship -- unless a god.

However, the cultist in the Catacombs paint many different women .. why? .. I believe because it was in fact women who where the first priest. The original version of the Bible held women in much higher regard, so it only makes sense.

Speculation of course. Then again, so is religion in general.

And because this is redundant.. I take my leave.

reply to post by Conspiriology


"Were you in the Schools they had where nuns could beat you sensless!!"

They seem to have had some success.

Originally posted by Robhaidheuch
reply to post by Conspiriology

 

"Were you in the Schools they had where nuns could beat you sensless!!"

They seem to have had some success.

Ya know, when ever I see people take opportunities NOT to post anything substantive but just because they feel like such insignificant little pissants they got to be smart alecks.


Now just so I know which one YOU are, since you seem to only have posted to insult me. I think Ill just see if you will take responsibility for your question , give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are serious.

So smart guy,, what is it I said that makes you think it had any success?

Can you you share that with us ? I'd really like to hear this ?


Seeing that you are a noob on these boards I figure you arer either on a proxy or someone who is begging to be verbally bitch slapped where I am going to have to inform you, as much as you are deserving of it and as easily as I could do it to someone exhibiting your ostensible childhood age level,, your masochistic bent to instigate BS will have to go unsatisfied.

I don't waste time feeding the trolls so,,

you can join the iggy list

with the rest of them


- Con





[edit on 9-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

Originally posted by babloyi
In spite of the fact that nobody knows Christ's date of birth exactly, .

[edit on 5-7-2008 by babloyi]

Beg pardon, but because of the celestial observations, the exact day has been determined to have been 9/11, a day Lucifer decided to make a day of infamy.

Originally posted by Gregarious

Originally posted by babloyi
In spite of the fact that nobody knows Christ's date of birth exactly, .

[edit on 5-7-2008 by babloyi]

Beg pardon, but because of the celestial observations, the exact day has been determined to have been 9/11, a day Lucifer decided to make a day of infamy.

OK. It will only be a matter of time before someone asks, so I might as well ask it.

Would you care to elaborate on this?!?? Please...

Hate to tell those ignorant of reality, but the Roman Catholic Church is called that because it is headquartered in Rome. It has headquartered in Rome since St. Peter went to Rome in the first century A.D.

In fact, all other Christian Churches split off from the Roman Catholic Church, or from a sect that had already split off. Read your history folks, Luther, etc. were Catholic Priests that were dissatisfied with the way things were being run, and decided to reform the church. That's why it was called the "REFORMATION'.

And many of their complaints were completely accurate. Corruption had taken place, power was being abused, and many practices that were not based in Christianity were being followed. So, the Catholic Church reformed itself too.

Yes, Catholics are Christians.

To claim otherwise is to attempt to have the powers of God himself. You are trying to read into the hearts of others, and you are judging them on something that only God can judge.

And that is something that no true Christian should ever do.

reply to post by Conspiriology

Seeing that you are a noob on these boards ....

I noticed this a while back.
I just assumed that he was like a lot of people who are happy to go along just reading other people's posts, on ATS, as entertainment.
I could imagine his delight turning to horror, when he found this thread.
He comes from a place where discrimination against Catholics is real, and not a hypothetical, academic debate. (Robhaidheuch may have signed up in order to answer what he may have taken as personal attacks)
I would give him more than the benefit of the doubt, in this situation.
Personally, I was happy to see that he is not so disgusted, as to never come back to ATS.
I guess you have a problem with Catholics, but I think that is an issue you should take up with your parents, and not all Catholics, in general.
Sorry about inserting my opinion into this, but I have a way of finding sympathy for people who care enough about something, to get into a big argument over it.

(BTW-just in case anyone cares, I mentioned, a couple times, this Catholic woman I was going to church with. She is a cute little blond, blue eyed, 100% Irish by ancestry, girl who is a musical genius, who started college when she was barely 16, named Bridget.[I say she was cute, but she has two younger sisters who are stunningly beautiful])


[edit on 9-7-2008 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by Conspiriology


Learn to laugh at yourself ... everbody else does. Don't tell me the nuns beat a sense of humour out of you?

reply to post by jmdewey60


Thanks for recognising the reason I take this debate seriously. I really didn't intend to hurt anyone's feelings, but I saw room for injecting a little humour. Most of us are prone to having delicate egos, and I too am lax in the practise of humility. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Originally posted by jmdewey60


I noticed this a while back.
I just assumed that he was like a lot of people who are happy to go along just reading other people's posts, on ATS, as entertainment.
I could imagine his delight turning to horror, when he found this thread.
He comes from a place where discrimination against Catholics is real, and not a hypothetical, academic debate. (Robhaidheuch may have signed up in order to answer what he may have taken as personal attacks)
I would give him more than the benefit of the doubt, in this situation.
Personally, I was happy to see that he is not so disgusted, as to never come back to ATS.
I guess you have a problem with Catholics, but I think that is an issue you should take up with your parents, and not all Catholics, in general.
Sorry about inserting my opinion into this, but I have a way of finding sympathy for people who care enough about something, to get into a big argument over it.

I don't have to give him the benefit of the doubt when their is no doubt the REAL reason he may have for being persecuted is for the same reason I put him on ignore. Perhaps if he wouldn't intorduce himself to people acting like a child he wouldn't be treated that way by others.

Secondly, I had no idea he is Catholic until YOU mentioned it so NO you are way off base there too as that had nothing to do with it. You can grope for excuses to feel sorry for him or support him what ever the justification but to me,,,


The guy is a putts

plane and simple

- Con

reply to post by Conspiriology

Secondly, I had no idea he is Catholic until YOU mentioned it so NO you are way off base there too as that had nothing to do with it. You can grope for excuses to feel sorry for him or support him what ever the justification but to me,,,

I was talking about the same post, that you made, about how the church freaked you out with the gruesome statues and mean Nuns.
What I was trying to say is that was apparently something your parents put you through.
It seems to have had a negative impression on you.
I do not remember outing anyone as a Catholic.
If you could not figure out that he was a Catholic, on your own, well, I do not see any really good reason for that.
I am trying to "support" civil discourse and finding common ground with our fellow man.

Originally posted by passenger
reply to post by VIKINGANT

 

Much obliged for the kind response. Every now and then I catch a coherent thought and try to capitalize on it. This time it paid off!

That being said, I hope that post doesn’t become a thread-killer for you. I’d really like to see this one go on for a while, as it is a subject near and dear to my sacred heart.

I would be greatly interested in your opinion on the subject as it has evolved so far. Whom do you think is making the stronger case?

Hi Passenger,
So it turns out it wasn't a thread killer after all...

Now that things have slowed up a little and I wont sway the discussion I will now answer your question as promised in the U2U.

Since the discussion has turned into two questions I will answer for both.

Are Catholics Christian in "Origin"
So far it would seem no. they appear to have taken pieces of Christianity and various Pagan relgions (dependng on which post you read) and combined them into one for thier own purposes (depending on which post you read) although the essential teachings of Christ are still the focal point.

Are Catholics Christian in "Nature"
The high RCC it would seem is far from it now and historically. But the garden variety practicing Catholic most definately. But then there are those born into the faith and are Catholic by default and only go to church for the purposes of hatching, matching and despatching who call themselves Christian because they have the last supper hanging on thier lungeroom wall, wear a crucifix and go to confessional twice a year. This group in general are not Christian

reply to post by VIKINGANT

...But the garden variety practicing Catholic most definately...

If we want to be Christian, ourselves, we need to be able to recognize our brothers, no matter what brand name is on the sign in front of their church