No, the dragon is a symbol for Satan. Just as the woman is a symbol for giving birth to an idea or nation or whatever. Making the woman the real Mary is just too easy, and too selfserving. 
Posted on 07/23/2007 3:36:15 PM PDT by annalex
Sunday, July 22, 2007
As a young Catholic I was unaware of the amount of irrational hatred that was directed toward the Catholic Church and Catholics themselves. Growing up in Los Angeles I was not subject to the Fundamentalist “tracts” being placed on my family car while we were at Mass as I would have been had I lived in the “Bible Belt”. My exposure to people of other faiths was frequent and always positive. The majority of my friends growing were Jewish as were the girls whom I had the honor of dating. My babysitter growing up was Mormon, as was my Paternal Grandfather. My Paternal Grandmother is a Methodist and my Father was an atheist for most of his life. My Maternal Grandfather was a Presbyterian from a family that produced many deacons. However, my Maternal Grandmother was an Irish Catholic and thus my Mother was a Catholic and therefore we were raised Catholic. None of this was seen as a conflict. None of the above people in my family ever acted as though anything was “wrong” with my siblings and I being raised Catholic.
In my college years I essentially fell away from the faith. I still called myself a “Catholic” but had no particular belief in any of the dogmas that makes one a Catholic. I just knew that I was of Irish ancestry and thus was “Catholic”. My beliefs were for the most part agnostic. I thought that true believers were absurd (I included both theist and atheist true believers as absurd).
While in college I heard all about how the Catholic Church was responsible for the Dark Ages, the destruction of the Native Peoples of the Americas, the Holocaust, the Inquisition, pimples on teenagers, Milli-Vanilli and just about everything else that negatively effected anyone anywhere at anytime everywhere. I learned how peaceful and wonderful Muslim societies were and how Christians lived very well under Islamic rule. And how the Crusades were an evil move by a corrupt Pope to throw off that wonderful balance and have a huge land grab for greedy Churchman and Nobles. I heard how nothing good happened in the Christian world and no good men were produced in the Christian world until Marin Luther and later "the Enlightenment". I look back now and marvel at how I remained a Catholic even if it was in name only. All my history professors with their fancy PhDs thought Catholicism was a force for evil in the Western World who was I to disagree? Of course I just went along and got good grades and degrees not really challenging the idiocy that I was being taught.
There I was just a young guy going through life not contemplating the great issues of life and certainly not contemplating being a Catholic when I had the misfortune to meet a Rabbi that was a friend of my wife’s family. During our discussion, the rabbi told me about things that Christians “buy into” like the Trinity and the fact that Jesus was God. I was told that I could never understand Jews and their suffering at the hands of Catholics. I was told that I “would never know what it is to be a Jew or how it feels to have your children forced to sing Christmas carols (oh the horror! the horror!)”. I would never know what it is like to look at someone like me and see the Inquisition and the Crusades. Now, anyone who is not a self absorbed bigot would know that talking to a person who is half Irish and Catholic knows a little something of prejudice and persecution. My ancestors could not own land in their own country. They had to pay taxes to a foreign English master and support his foreign Church that was a parasite on their own land. They had real persecution. If they could have gotten off with simply singing Church of Ireland songs rather than pay taxes to and be persecuted by the British, I'm sure they would have gladly accepted. But why look past ones on victim-hood in order to see truth, when victim-hood is so much more of a commodity in our modern society.
At that point I made a commitment to understand my faith. I would never let someone attack the beliefs of my ancestors as this rabbi did without making a strong defense. My ancestors were willing to be persecuted (the real kind of persecution not the Christmas Carol kind) rather than abandon their faith. The least I could do is understand what they found so important as to endure what they did. Thus starting my journey toward becoming a passionate believer. The irony of a anti-Catholic bigoted rabbi bringing me closer to the truth of Christ is absolutely wonderful.
I started reading books by the usual authors that are sold at Borders and Barnes & Noble like George Weigel. While informative they were, upon reflection, very superficial. However, I happened upon a book called “Catholicism verses Fundamentalism” by Karl Keating. I thought it was simply going to be an analysis of Catholic beliefs versus Fundamentalist beliefs. What I had purchased was a wonderful combination of satire and apologetics. It has become the definitive apologetics book produced in the last 30 years. The title of the book itself mocks Jimmy Swaggarts silly book “Catholicism and Christianity”. Throughout the book I was baptized by fire into the world of anti-Catholicism. I learned about such Fundamentalist writers and “thinkers” as Lorraine Boettner, Alexander Hislop, Jimmy Swaggart, Jack Chick and others. Keating dismantled their arguments so thoroughly that one wonders how these people are not all routinely dismissed even by honest Fundamentalists. Sadly, low rent bigots like Hislop, Boettner and Dave Hunt are still widely read in Fundamentalist circles. Swaggart has fallen out of favor as we all know. Keating opened up a new door to me. I now was ready for the next step and started buying every book by Chesterton and Belloc I could find as they are the greatest apologists for the Catholic faith in the last 100 years.
The Holy Spirit has a funny way of working. I became friends with a wonderful guy who happens to be a Fundamentalist Christian. As we would talk he would mention some of the things that Keating talked about in his book. I was informed that Peter never went to Rome and that the Church was founded by Constantine the Great, and that Easter is really “Ishtar” and other scholarly insights that occupy the minds of Fundamentalist writers. I was told all about Catholicism and how it is really just paganism re-written. To his and most Fundamentalists credit, they literally do not know they are repeating lies. These books are sold at Protestant Book Stores and Churches. Also, he informed me of these things out of love as he believed my soul was in peril. So he could not process the refutations that I would make to him and just go on to the next attack. Most Catholics know about this tactic that Fundamentalists use. They will tell us what we believe and how stupid we are for believing it. 99% of the time they are wrong. The problem is that they have been told by Dave Hunt (his bio is from "rapture ready") or James White that the Calumnies that they are stating are Gospel truth.
After a while I began to pick up more and more apologetics material to refute my friends claims. I also decided that I would no longer play defense with him. I would attack his belief in sola scriptura (scripture alone) and sola fide (faith alone). When I would press him and ask about where those teachings are found in the Bible he would have no answer. This lead to his anger that I was asking too much to show me where the Bible taught either one of those Protestant Traditions (Traditions of men, not of God I might add). I would also repeat what he would say to me but re-phrase it to see if he really was willing to stand by it. For instance, he once told me that he was passionately anti-Catholic. I responded “Really? So if I were Jewish would it be okay for you to tell me that you are passionately anti-Jew?” He was taken aback and responded “Of course not!” I then responded “I guess some hatred is acceptable while others is not”. His response….silence. And then move on to the next attack. That is generally the tactic of the anti-Catholic. Never acknowledge that they are wrong, just move on to the next attack until they find something that the Catholic cannot answer. Usually it ends with some obscure Pope from the 7th century that no one knows about.
Anti-Catholicism rots the mind. It blinds people and they become obsessed with the destruction of something that they cannot destroy. People have been trying for 2000 years. Churchmen like Roger Mahoney have done their best. But the Gates of Hell will not prevail against it. So this leads to desperation. Which then leads to all kinds of ridiculous theories and outright lies about what Catholics believe and do. It does not stop with Fundamentalist Christians though. Before we think “well that’s just those weird bible-thumpers” let’s examine some things that people just “know”.
People "just know" that the Catholic Church did nothing in the Americas but persecute the indigenous people and massacre them. We "just know" that Priests never stood up to the Spaniards. Of course this is untrue. It is true that there were Catholic Priests who conducted themselves terribly during colonial times. However, it was Catholic Priests who sought to make life better for the indigenous people. Jesuits armed Indians against the Spanish in Paraguay, Francisco de Vittoria pleaded with the Spanish King in defense of the Indians. Most people in the Americas have never heard of Bartoleme de las Casas. Las Casas, a Spanish Dominican Priest has been called the Father of anti-imperialism and anti-racism. There is also Antonio Montesino who was the first person, in 1511, to denounce publicly in America the enslavement and oppression of the Indians as sinful and disgraceful to the Spanish nation. There of course were villains in the Spanish system but so were there in the American and English systems that were dominated by Protestants. We don’t hear about the brutality of Protestant lands in the US. We hear about those backward Spanish Catholics (who built the first Universities in the Americas) but not about the theocratic police state established in Geneva by John Calvin or the massacres carried out by Anabaptists in Munster.
In some cases anti-Catholicism is not only profitable it can allow for common bullies to slander and desecrate the memory of men finer than themselves without repercussions. Take the case of Daniel Goldhagen. He has made a career out of slandering the Catholic Church. Commenting on Mr. Goldhagens slanderous book A Moral Reckoning, Rabbi David Dalin, described Goldhagens work as "failing to meet even the minimum standards of scholarship.” He went on to say “That the book has found its readership out in the fever swamps of anti-Catholicism isn't surprising. But that a mainstream publisher like Knopf would print the thing is an intellectual and publishing scandal." This statement is absolutely correct. Let us be honest though, Goldhagen simply represents the double-standard that exists in our society. He is a left wing Jew who attacks the only group that it is acceptable to attack in modern American society, the evil Catholics. If a right wing Catholic were to make his living by attacking Judaism and slandering a prominent rabbi while blaming Judaism for the Marxist massacres under the NKVD he would be an out of work “conspiracy kook” and a anti-Semite. He would certainly not be published in the New Republic. Goldhagen has made the absurd statement that Christianity is anti-Semitic at its core. Imagine if one were to say that Judaism is anti-Gentile to its core. They would be isolated as an anti-Semite. The message is clear. A Jewish bigot like Goldhagen gets published by Knopf and the New Republic while his mirror image would be isolated and vilified.
I would like to wrap up with some other observations. All Catholics are told endless stories about Catholics persecuting people. Generally it starts with a Catholic King who orders the persecution of a group and despite the Bishops or Pope condemning it, "the Catholics" are to blame. An example of his would be during the Crusades when Crusaders massacred Jews along the Rhine. That was “the Catholics” despite the local Bishops hiding and protecting Jews. When a Protestant barbarian like Oliver Cromwell slaughters Catholics at Drogheda and sells the women and children into sex slavery or sacks Wexford that’s not “the Protestants”. That’s just Cromwell.
Much is made about Hitler being a baptized Catholic by ignoramuses like Dave Hunt. Other bigots like Goldhagen argue that Nazism was an extension of Catholic bigotry through the ages. Yet these people do not mention that Karl Marx was a Jew and that the ranks of the NKVD, some of the greatest murderers of all time, were filled with Jews. By using Goldhagens logic should we not attack Judaism and Jews? If we Catholics are and our faith are responsible for a former Catholic who later went so far as to persecute the Church, should not Jews be held responsible for Karl Marx and Genrikh Yagoda and the fact that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish. The answer is of course not. Your Jewish neighbor has likely not heard of the NKVD, Yagoda let alone support what he and they did.
As I wrap up my thoughts on this I should say thank you to all of the people that I mention above. Especially the Rabbi who started my journey. Had he not been a self absorbed bigot, he would not have angered me and I would not have explored my own faith. I would have continued in my ignorance and would not have understood the faith that built Western Civilization and sustained my ancestors. I would not have understood the faith that Christ taught to the Apostles, that was passed on to their successors, our Bishops. I would not truly know the joy of being a Catholic. His ignorant statements brought about my reversion back to the true faith and my wife’s conversion to it. For that, I will literally be eternally indebted to him.
No, the dragon is a symbol for Satan. Just as the woman is a symbol for giving birth to an idea or nation or whatever. Making the woman the real Mary is just too easy, and too selfserving.
Actually, you got the Word from the Catholic Church.
The Church decided what was Scripture and what wasn’t. I presume that your Bible is abridged thanks to the efforts of an errant Catholic monk.
Co- in this sense means: subordinate or auxiliary. Consult your dictionary if you need to. Not equal to by any means. I think that you’re hung up on this concept; a true reading of any of the thousands of references put up in these threads, or even a reading of the Catechism ought to put your fears to rest. Mary is no deity. The Church doesn’t consider her to be one. But she received the Holy Spirit before anyone else did and He conceived Jesus in her. That makes her special.
The books of the New Testament were written over many years. Are you saying that the books were only written by people who knew Jesus? Where do you back that up Scripturally? Or at all?
And if understanding the Bible is so easy, then why are there thousands of different interpretations out there, some of them so radically different? If it’s so easy, then why did the Church have to identify and guard against radical heresies? If it’s so easy, then why do so many people get it so wrong?
It sounds to me that you have created the church of William Terrell (population one). Lots of that kind of church out there.
What indicates to you which is symbol and which is actual? And if it is a symbol, how do you decide what it is a symbol for?
If I don't understand what it says, I figure it out (necessary for much of Paul's convoluted reasoning). If passages need further interpretation, I interpret it consistent with what was said elsewhere that was clear.
Ah, so the church is taking credit for writing the bible now. How entertaining. The Word contradicts what the Catholic church teaches.
You use a part of the Bible, and the one you use with hundreds of mistranslation, though I guess that doesn’t matter, because you claim all you need is the four Gospels. Nonetheless, I was speaking of the method of argument, not the points of the dispute.
“The terms put Mary on the same level and with the same job as Christ. Words mean things. The prefix “co-” has a precise meaning that the Catholic church cannot change without sophistry.”(WT)
Once, again, Not a single other person on this thread has made the claims which you attribute to all Catholics (of which those here have repeatedly denied). This is a figment of your imagination, and you refuse to look up the words to see what they mean, so I suppose you will have to live with your misconception.
“Then whence came “Mariology” and the seed doctrine for it?”(WT)
From the Church at it’s inception, almost 2000 years ago, though the things you keep bringing up are mere figments of your imagination.
“The written New Testament and the books therein were written by those who lived at the time and even knew Jesus, if not actually with Him. Then comes a council of men centuries afterward and make pronouncements on those writings, saying that they know things that weren’t written.”(WT)
I hate to keep saying the same thing repeatedly, when apparently you don’t read it. The Apostles learned from Jesus. He told them to go forth and teach all the nations. There was no Bible. Jesus Christ did not write a book. Nor did He have any indication at all, that anybody should read a book, to receive the gospel. There were lots and lots of writings floating all over the world. Some were inspired, some were error. After almost 400 years, it was causing confusion and heresy. The Church (all those con men, to you) assembled the bishops of the world to decide what was true and what was erroneous. They set the canon of the Bible. If you really believe as you say lower, they have always been con men, you should throw your Bible in the trash, because that where it came from. And the men who wrote those Gospels were Catholic bishops-or con men, to you.
“Then, they proceed to make labored interpretations of scripture and new doctrines not found in scripture that benefits the power and wealth of the organization to which they belong.”(WT)
They have been making those “labored interpretations,” since the year 33. Seems to me, it’s only in relatively recent times, folks started making labored interpretations, like yourself.
“I’ll stay with the written word, thank you. Even if there were additional valid material not written down, that which is written must be entirely sufficient for salvation. The addenda would make no difference at all.”(WT)
It’s a free country, WT, but that’s sort of like the backyard mechanic, rebuilding his car engine, and decides to use only the even numbered instructions, and ignore step 1,3,5,7, etc. I’m sure he will say, “I’m sure the what’s written in even numbers is entirely sufficient to rebuild my engine. The odd numbered instructions would make no difference at all.” Suit yourself, but keep in mind, all the instructions were given by Christ.
“IF it does, then we have serious problems across the Christian world, and Hell is full already.”(WT)
I can assure you, from what Christ said, Hell is not full, and won’t be until the end of the world.
“So, you’re saying that Mary, being assigned Mediatrix with the Lord God and Co-redemtrix with Christ Jesus was not worthy of mention by those who charged to bring the Gospel to the world? It was a “secret” word of mouth thing?”(WT)
Yes, that’s what I’m saying...everything was a word of mouth thing. Remember? There was no book. Christ said “HEAR my Church.” He never said, “Read my book.” Read it this time: A WORD OF MOUTH THING. There wasn’t even the slightest possibility of anything else for almost 400 years, and nobody would have even dreamed about anything else for 1500 years.
“Simon was a con man. Peter was pretty clear about that don’t you think?”(WT)
You’re losing me. Peter was Simon, before Christ changed his name.
“If you treat a person like a deity, do things toward that person you would do toward a deity, acknowledge the deity of a holy one and place that person on the same level as that tone by terminology, you are worshiping that person”(WT)
Since you keep repeating the same, silly accusations, I guess I’ll repeat the same also. No Catholics do any of the things you mentioned above.
“The complete plan, belief and faith through belief, seeking the kingdom of God first and the kingdom of God being within each individual, submitting to the laws of God already written and the frame of mind taught by Jesus is entirely sufficient by itself and all is written with great clarity.”(WT)
That’s another breathtaking statement. What was written was mixed with dozens of false writings, and nobody knew which were true and/or false, but it didn’t matter, because, as you said it above, it was a word of mouth thing, like Christ Himself said it should be.
“Did the Catholic church write the texts of the Bible?”(WT)
Yes, all the New Testament. Every word was written by Catholics, and the Catholic Church determined which of all the writings were true, and preserved that Bible through the whole of the middle ages and up to today.
“Mere men are con artists. Every one of the Catholic leaders are, and always have been, mere men running an artificial entity dependent for its existence on membership of the only entities with souls that need saving. The organization has no soul.”(WT)
Then by all means, toss your Bible in the trash, because you are reading information from those very Catholic leaders you say are con men. The “entity” was instituted by Jesus Christ, Himself. The Soul of the Church is Christ, Himself. The Church is the Body of Christ. It is a living, breathing organism, which is why it has existed for 2000 years and will be here till the end of the world. Otherwise, it would have ceased to exist, like all other governments and organizations on the face of the earth. They come and they go. The Body of Christ cannot be destroyed, and we have Christ’s Word on that.
“That gives no church on Earth any sovereignty beyond a meeting place for believers.”(WT)
There is only one Church that is sovereign, the Catholic Church, which is why it isn’t ruled by a government, although it has sometimes rules governments, and why it exists as it’s own territorial boundaries, in Rome, as a sovereign country. It is not just a place to meet, for believers, but rather a place to offer sacrifice to God, the only Church capable of pleasing God, as He demands.
“No one is a fool for Christ if he follows His teachings. You may be a fool for a man made organization, though. Lot’s of those nowadays.”(WT)
I was just quoting St Paul, though I’m not worthy. Then again, you said you don’t think his writings mean anything of importance, since it’s not one of the four Gospels.-Glenn
I suppose that’s true. It’s what I think you are doing. I see perverts making passages say what they think justifying homosexual actions, but that doesn’t make it so. All that shows is that a final arbiter is necessary, and Christ gave us that, in Peter and his successors.
“If the Catholic pope says it, or the magisterium, or any other man, including me, that doesn’t make it true. However, scripture exists, and I just repeat it.”(WT)
If all you were doing was repeating scripture, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. It’s your interpretations conflicting with the true meanings, and your contempt, as you said, for the Catholic Church and Catholics that keep this going. -Glenn
“Where I’m going is who decides which books are valid and which not. “(WT)
Yes, I figured that. It’s not “who decides,” but rather who decidED, and as I said, it was the Catholic bishops in 399AD. They remained the same until the 16th century, when protestants decided to change various and sundry words and passages to fit what they thought it should say for their new religion. They could only do it then, because the printing press had been invented, and they could print “modified” bibles. They tossed out several books from the OT and the NT, because those books didn’t agree with their new ideas, like yours, about reading a book to have all you need to be saved. Many things they missed deleting, like John 6, so they just deny that, as you said you do, also. “Plain meaning,” is what you say, until you run across something really plain and clear, but it conflicts with what you want to believe, and then they just deny it, and call it analogy. The Bible IS a Catholic document. Well, not your’s, because it was “changed to suit the customer.”
“Win? I though we were searching for truth. “(WT)
Some of are. But when you just repeat the same tired accusations, when they’ve been repeatedly denied, and refuse to actually look to find what words mean, and deny some things are authoritive, when there is no other possible, logical explanation, that’s not searching for the truth. -Glenn
Oh. I thought you weren’t preconditioned. Are you saying, you do or don’t listen to preachers explain to you what it means? You ever read books that explain scripture?-Glenn
“Ah, so the church is taking credit for writing the bible now. How entertaining. The Word contradicts what the Catholic church teaches.”(WT)
No, not now. Always. Mathew, Mark, Luke & John were bishops of the Catholic Church. You are wrong in the second sentence, too. -Glenn
I use the Masters own words. In the final analysis, those are the only ones that count.
Once, again, Not a single other person on this thread hasmade the claims which you attribute to all Catholics (of which those here have repeatedly denied). This is a figment of your imagination, and you refuse to look up the words to see what they mean, so I suppose you will have to live with your misconception.
Christ is the Redeemer. If Mary is refereed to as the coredemptrix that puts her on the same level as Christ. As I said, words mean things. I have seen Catholics kneel before statutes of Mary erected on sites where someone has claimed they saw her apparition. I read Catholic prayers and many are directly to Mary.
What quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells like a duck and lays duck eggs is not an eagle.
From the Church at it’s inception, almost 2000 years ago, though the things you keep bringing up are mere figments of your imagination.
The point is that Mariology came from men, not a doctrine taught by Christ nor preached by the Apostles, and is not written anywhere in spite of numerous opportunities for those charged with spreading the Gospel to do so.
I hate to keep saying the same thing repeatedly, when apparently you don’t read it. The Apostles learned from Jesus. He told them to go forth and teach all the nations. There was no Bible. Jesus Christ did not write a book. Nor did He have any indication at all, that anybody should read a book, to receive the gospel. There were lots and lots of writings floating all over the world. Some were inspired, some were error. After almost 400 years, it was causing confusion and heresy. The Church (all those con men, to you) assembled the bishops of the world to decide what was true and what was erroneous. They set the canon of the Bible. If you really believe as you say lower, they have always been con men, you should throw your Bible in the trash, because that where it came from. And the men who wrote those Gospels were Catholic bishops-or con men, to you.
Do you think the collected works of the men living at the time of Christ called the Bible is the written word of God and that what it says is accurate and can be relied on?
They have been making those “labored interpretations,” since the year 33. Seems to me, it’s only in relatively recent times, folks started making labored interpretations, like yourself.
Yes? And age renders lies to truth?
It’s a free country, WT, but that’s sort of like the backyard mechanic, rebuilding his car engine, and decides to use only the even numbered instructions, and ignore step 1,3,5,7, etc. I’m sure he will say, “I’m sure the what’s written in even numbers is entirely sufficient to rebuild my engine. The odd numbered instructions would make no difference at all.” Suit yourself, but keep in mind, all the instructions were given by Christ.
A backyard mechanic must do what works consistent with the design of the engine.
It is very convenient for an organization of men to say that what is written is incomplete. We know the rest that was kept secret and is necessary for your salvation.
If you heard this from any other source and in any other endeavor, you would immediately label it a con.
Yes, that’s what I’m saying...everything was a word of mouth thing. Remember? There was no book. Christ said “HEAR my Church.” He never said, “Read my book.” Read it this time: A WORD OF MOUTH THING. There wasn’t even the slightest possibility of anything else for almost 400 years, and nobody would have even dreamed about anything else for 1500 years.
Ah, yes, a secret word of mouth thing that was never written down in all the collected writing that is the Bible.
Right.
You’re losing me. Peter was Simon, before Christ changed his name.
Acts 8:9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
Acts 8:10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
Acts 8:11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.
Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Acts 8:13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
Acts 8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
Acts 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
Acts 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Acts 8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
Acts 8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
Acts 8:19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
Acts 8:20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
Acts 8:21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
Acts 8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
Acts 8:23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
That’s another breathtaking statement.
I consider it a breath taking statement to say that there are things necessary to the salvation of an individual's soul that were left out of the written works of the New Testament and placed solely in the hands of an organization of men to control.
Yes, all the New Testament. Every word was written by Catholics, and the Catholic Church determined which of all the writings were true, and preserved that Bible through the whole of the middle ages and up to today.
Another breath taking statement. Did they use a plot wheel, or did a priest work on the what they wanted in each chapter? Who contrived the stories?
And amazing when you consider so much of it contradicts what the Catholic church teaches, including the entire approach to the Gospels.
Then by all means, toss your Bible in the trash, because you are reading information from those very Catholic leaders you say are con men. The “entity” was instituted by Jesus Christ, Himself. The Soul of the Church is Christ, Himself. The Church is the Body of Christ. It is a living, breathing organism, which is why it has existed for 2000 years and will be here till the end of the world. Otherwise, it would have ceased to exist, like all other governments and organizations on the face of the earth. They come and they go. The Body of Christ cannot be destroyed, and we have Christ’s Word on that.
You are again telling me that the Catholic church considers the New Testament fiction they wrote for their own purposes?
There is only one Church that is sovereign, the Catholic Church
Goes directly against the teachings of Christ. Is arrogant and deceitful.
Then again, you said you don’t think his writings mean anything of importance, since it’s not one of the four Gospels.
Paul and all the Apostles taught only what Jesus brought to teach. If they taught otherwise or inconsistently, they must be in error, according to Paul's own words.
You have been and continue to be conned. I will continue to point it out. This is very mean of me, because you are responsible for the truth of knowledge even though you reject it, as even the Catholic church teaches.
Wow what a vile article. This person obviously hates anyone that is not a Catholic, how sad for him or her whatever.
Peter is dead and as far as I know he had no children, enev though head had been married.
If all you were doing was repeating scripture, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. It’s your interpretations conflicting with the true meanings, and your contempt, as you said, for the Catholic Church and Catholics that keep this going.
How shall I interpret the following?
Matthew 6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
I would suspect that makes the authority claimed by the Carholic church = 0.
Every miscreant caught denies the accusations, too.
If you have an argument against the common meaning of Mediatrix and coRedeptrix, make it.
No mention of the Carholic church anywhere in the scripture.
That's a good Catholic...
You read it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.