Does the Catholic Church Teach "Doctrines of Demons?"

Catholic Answers ^ | July 21, 2013 | Tim Staples

[Jvette]

LOL, thanks. Left myself wide open with that one.

[verga]

Even the best of you guys tells us that since the cracker and the wine still looks, tastes, smells, feels and talks like a cracker and wine after the so-called consecration where this stuff turns into flesh and blood, it becomes a matter of Catholic Faith that the event actually took place

Go to Google or Bing and look up Eucharistic miracles.

While you are doing that please get back to Mark and I on how Bing and Google both support the Catholic understanding/ translation of "Born from above."

[Iscool]

So, while this may seem to be a “gotcha” moment; it really is just a pathetic and vain attempt to obfuscate rather than edify

You couldn't be more wrong...Cousin or kinfolk or relative would work just fine in Luke 1:36...The point is, cousin is used apparently to show that the kinsmen or relatives in that verse are not brothers (which they are not)...They are cousins of one sort or another...

So the Catholic argument that there is no word for cousin in Aramaic is meaningless...There is a word for cousin in the Greek and it is used in Luke 1:36 and other places...And this can be put in contrast to:

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Brethren does not mean relative or kinfolk or cousin...Brethren means 'brother'...Just as sister means, wait for it,,,,,,, sister...

[CynicalBear]

>>Just as the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and Jesus was conceived, He comes upon the offerings of bread and wine and they become the body and blood of Jesus.<<

Or so the RCC has duped it’s adherents into believing. It’s a mystical, magical mystery tour!

Here’s the truth.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Acts 15:29 That you abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if you keep yourselves, you shall do well. Fare you well.

But Catholics say it’s the flesh that prophiteth and drinking blood is worship.

[Iscool]

Jesus does not force anyone to stay, but nor does He deceive or lay traps to test His believers. This teaching was not necessary save for one reason. Jesus meant what He said, that His body is true food and His blood true drink.

Joh 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Then you've never been hungry nor thirsty since you partook of your first Eucharist...Either that's true or you are wrong about the flesh and blood...

Joh 4:13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
Joh 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

Did you get some of that water too???

[CynicalBear]

>>I'm going to guess that you will have something to say in response to me that will be a disagreement of some sort of what I have said, either about some trivial matter of contention or disagreeing with everything I have just written or both.<<

First of all you didn’t write that unless you are indeed Ryan G. Duns, SJ. Second, that entire piece by Ryan was an attempt to somehow justify the man made doctrines of the RCC. It doesn’t line up with what the RCC does when interpreting scripture. The RCC injects what it wants into scripture or develops completely outside of scripture it’s doctrines while all to often incorporating pagan beliefs and customs.

[Rashputin]

It's interesting that the anti-Catholic crowd constantly repeats the same lies no matter how often they are shown to be lies.

It reminds me of how the Turks had collaborators who organized formal debates between Protestants and Catholics in areas they were planning to invade or only partially controlled. Anything they could do to spread divisions they would promote.

[Iscool]

This does a much better job of explaining things than I could ever do:

Trying to prove that 'until' doesn't mean 'until' in the scriptures to prove that when Mary didn't 'know' Joseph 'til' after Jesus was born:::

There is also the burial of Moses. The book of Deuteronomy says that no one knew the location of his grave "until this present day" (Deut. 34:6, Knox). But we know that no one has known since that day either.

You notice that some guy named Knox had to correct the perversion but he left it there anyway...What's a little deception, eh???

What the bible really says...

Deu 34:6 And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.

This is the kind of stuff they (the Catholic Church) constantly pulls to get people to believe their lies...

[narses]

[FourtySeven]

I didn’t say I wrote what is hyperlinked.

What I said, that I then was guessing you would disagree with, was: “If the fact that a Jesuit wrote this scares you (or anyone) then simply consider this: The Church (whether the reader here believes that is some invisible church of believers or the Catholic Church is irrelevant here, for this point) is also, literally the Body of Christ. Does that mean Jesus cries out in pain when one of its members hurts himself/herself?”

For the record. As I didn’t want to leave any confusion about whether or not I was the priest that wrote what I hyperlinked.

Thanks for that.

[FourtySeven]

Arguing with a zealot about their insane ideas is a largely bootless task.

You are correct of course.

[Iscool]

As St. Thomas Aquinas observed, Christ is not quoted as saying, " This bread is my body," but " This is my body" ( Summa Theologiae, III q. 78, a. 5).

Joh 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

Was Aquinas lying, or just confused???

[Jvette]

The word used in Luke is not the word for cousin, which makes the argument that Catholics can’t have it both ways because Elizabeth is called Mary’s cousin, moot.

That was the crux of the post was it not?

****Brethren does not mean relative or kinfolk or cousin...Brethren means ‘brother’...Just as sister means, wait for it,,,,,,, sister...*****

Yes, this would seem problematic for Catholic doctrine but it isn’t for the simple reason that brethren is used in other instances where the relationship is clearly not as siblings. So too are brother and sister, so the mere use does not definitively mean a shared DNA with Jesus. My stepsister is my sister though we do not have a common parent.

Also, Jesus is called “the” son of Mary, not “a” son of Mary and none of His “brethren” are called sons or daughters of Mary. We simply don’t know from Scripture exactly who is being referred to here or how they are the brothers and sister of Jesus.

Were these children of Joseph from a previous marriage? There is no way to know since Scripture never makes it clear. We have very little to go on regarding the early life of Jesus.

In the story where Mary and Joseph return to Jerusalem to find Jesus in the temple, there is no mention of siblings being with their group. It is only Mary and Joseph who return to find Him.

I think that protestants make much of this for one reason only and that is as an attempt to justify their rejection of the one, true Church.

[narses]

Is Iscool lying, or just confused??? I mean really! When you exceprt small sections of large tomes and try and make them into an argument, is that dishonesty or simple mindedness?

[FourtySeven]

And by the way, here:

Second, that entire piece by Ryan was an attempt to somehow justify the man made doctrines of the RCC. It doesn’t line up with what the RCC does when interpreting scripture. The RCC injects what it wants into scripture or develops completely outside of scripture it’s doctrines while all to often incorporating pagan beliefs and customs.

...you couldn't be more wrong. In fact, it is for this reason (that the Church doesn't take Scripture as "literalistic" all the time) that frustrates many of her critics here and elsewhere.

[presently no screen name]

When he seems to have said things they agree with (no matter WHEN he might have said it nor if he ever retracted or changed it) they are more than delighted to post his words.

And that is where you come in! I can rely on your posts being accurate for you have no ax to grind. I have little knowledge of him, mostly basics - like his spiritual eyes were opened and he saw the Truth because he was seeking God with all his heart and the Vatican hates him for exposing them and passed on their hate to their 'subjects'. However, I do laugh when they default and then attack the man of God, Luther.

After 500 years, their bitterness is still alive. Luther, being obedient to God, made a MIGHTY lasting impact on them they have yet to recover from and never will for the chains of bondage have been cut and God's WORD is Alive and Active to refute their hold on anyone's salvation - other than those we remain in 'it'. So thanks for keeping the naysayers honest as they 'try' to defame a man used by God to accomplish HIS WILL and one they never met but just disagree with for 'tradition' sake.

Ever wonder why they don't do the same to even one of their many bad popes? I'll just mark that one as 'cover up is the catholic way'. The dirty laundry is hidden in with their artwork that, also, will be burned up. Their pomp will turn to puff!

[Iscool]

Go to Google or Bing and look up Eucharistic miracles.

I'll do better than that...Send me one of those consecrated crackers...There's a lab not far from my house...I'll pay them to test whats in the cracker...And I'll post the results here on FR...

[Iscool]

Thanks for you scholarly input...

[presently no screen name]

It's interesting that the anti-Catholic crowd constantly repeats the same lies no matter how often they are shown to be lies.

What IS interesting is the anti-WORD crowd doesn't have a clue about GOD'S WORD because it is spiritually discerned - but that doesn't stop them because someone has to support evil in it's opposition to God's Word. They are simply being obedient to their master and seem proud doing it.