Posted on 01/25/2014 6:51:38 AM PST by GonzoII
Consider the election of Pope Damasus 1, who is officially a Roman Catholic Church "saint."
On the death of Liberius on 24 September 366, one faction supported Ursinus (or Ursicinus), who had served as deacon to Liberius, while another faction, previously loyal to the Antipope Felix II, supported Damasus. The upper-class partisans of Felix supported the election of Damasus, but the opposing supporters of Liberius, the deacons and laity, supported Ursinus. The two were elected simultaneously (Damasus' election was held in San Lorenzo in Lucina) in an atmosphere of rioting. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Damasus_I#Succession_crisis
Oxford historian J. N. D. Kelly (whom RCAs sometimes quote) writes that Damasus hired a gang of thugs that stormed the Julian Basilica, carrying out a three day massacre of the Ursinians. - Kelly, J. N. D. (1989). The Oxford Dictionary of Popes. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 32,34
And this from RC Eamon Duffy FBA, FSA, Irish Professor of the History of Christianity and past member of the Pontifical Historical Commission:
Since the mid third century there had been a growing assimilation of Christian and secular culture. It is already in evidence long before Constantine with the art of the Christian burial sites round the city, the catacombs. With the imperial adoption of Christianity, this process accelerated. In Damasus’ Rome, wealthy Christians gave each other gifts in which Christian symbols went alongside images of Venus, nereids and sea-monsters, and representations of pagan-style wedding-processions. - Eamon Duffy , author of "10 Popes Who Shook the World," etc.
More .
Which were not canonized by the Roman Catholic Church until Luther started the Reformation.
Those books, like Maccabees, were surely in the Jewish Temples at the time of Jesus.
Surely? Not quite sure, are you? They may have been in the Temple but they were not in the Jewish canon.
Wow! What a revelation. Who would have imagined that CATHOLICS might have played a part in the history of the US.
What they can't do is take full responsibility for it as they keep trying to do. And not only for that but for absolutely everything.
Kind of like the Ruskies during the Cold War. Whatever the US did, they did it first.
Wow! What a revelation. Who would have imagined that CATHOLICS might have played a part in the history of the US.
What they can't do is take full responsibility for it as they keep trying to do. And not only for that but for absolutely everything.
Kind of like the Ruskies during the Cold War. Whatever the US did, they did it first.
Then why does the RCC take credit for the BIBLE?
Since they take credit for it, then YOU tell US why it's called the Bible when the word isn't found in there.
I suppose a person could take each point in the article and either refute or confirm but let’s just take one at random:
“The key here is to understand Jesus not only quoted Scripture as authoritative, but he also referred to Tradition as authoritative in texts like Luke 16:22 (ever read anywhere of “Abraham’s Bosom” in the Old Testament? No, this was Jewish Tradition),”.
If it was Jewish tradition it was Jewish tradition from the Scriptures.
What is meant by the term “bosom position”? A position of favor and protection such as a shepherd might give a young lamb by holding it in the loose outer garments of the upper body. It is in this sense that Isa. 40:11 speaks of Jehovah gathering his people to His bosom.
When reclining to take a meal the person in front of another was said to occupy the bosom position, that person being able to lean his head back upon a friend and have an intimate conversation or perhaps even receive bits of food.
At any rate the Pharisees had claimed to be children of Abraham and therefore in the bosom position of God as Abraham represented Him. (John 8:31-41)
Need we note the Scriptures showing favor and promise to Abraham’s children or his seed?
Clearly Jesus’ illustration of “Abraham’s Bosom” is not just some Jewish tradition not found in Scripture but Jesus reference to Scripture already well known to his listeners.
Where is the verse referring to “Abraham’s Bosom” found in Scripture?
It all fits with the Roman Catholic meme that nothing good happens without Rome.
I know of Charles Carroll who signed the Declaration. If there was a second please provide.
Here is a good link.
http://errantskeptics.org/Religious-Affiliation-56-signers-DeclarationOfIndependence.htm
George Washington’s Return from Service to Mount Vernon, Christmas Eve, 1783
Remember, Remember (George Washington and Guy Fawkes Day)
A Tea Party Thomist: Charles Carroll
America’s Catholic Colony [Ecumenical]
The Catholic Church in the United States of America [Ecumenical]
Catholic Founding Fathers - The Carroll Family [Ecumenical]
Charles Carroll, founding father and "an exemplar of Catholic and republican virtue" [Ecumenical]
CITIZEN JOURNALISM: Founding Catholic [Father]
"How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization" ( Book Review )
Name of Signer (Constitution)
Daniel Carroll Maryland Catholic
Thomas Fitzsimons Pennsylvania Catholic
http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html
Where Catholics have the unmitigated gall to deny parts of scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit.
This world would have been much better off if the great heretic Martin Luther had been executed for heresy.
Apparently, God disagrees with you, which isn't surprising.
Did the Lord quote from them? No He didn't.
So, is it YOUR ridiculous interpretation of history that EVERY WORD spoke by Jesus was written down?
You are absurd.
Jesus visited the Temples, frequently. Jesus has no RECORDED statements or rebukes against the keepers of the Temples for any of the historical documents and manuscripts in the Temples.
If Jesus had a problem with Maccabees or any other writings, why did Jesus not say so, in order to bring both Christians and Jews along on the proper path?
BECAUSE JESUS HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THE BOOKS THAT MARTIN LUTHER PURGED FROM THE BIBLE!
No, because scripture informs us otherwise. John 20:31 31 But these are written that you may believe[a] that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
And yet to that Catholics must believe in more in order to be saved.
If Jesus had a problem with Maccabees or any other writings, why did Jesus not say so,
By the same token, purgatory. Huge turn from the rest of scripture. Such an important required doctrine surely would have been explained by the Author of our salvation. Offering prayer to mortal saints departed, I would love to have heard what Paul would have said had he known that the faithful he had instructed in the Gospel would so quickly disregard the "one intercessor between God and man". But since Catholics 'wrote the Bible', I wonder what they would have done with first second and third letters to the Catholics from Paul?
Where did Lazarus go between death and resurrection?
Jesus wept for his friend, and prayed for him.
What was the point, if at death all is decided already?
John 11
4 When he heard this, Jesus said, “This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it.”
John 11
41 So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42 I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me.”
Lazurus' 'death' was for the glory of God that those who saw his resurrection would believe.
What was the point, if at death all is decided already?
Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life He alone defeated death.
Further scripture informs us:
Hebrews 9:
26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
My bold. No, prayer for the dead is useless, pray for the living for their conversion, as the dead are judged at death rendering prayer ineffective since if condemned it avails nothing and if saved adds nothing. If there was 'another' way, would not our Savior have told us? To believe otherwise is Gnosticism.
Jesus told us what is right. He didn’t tell us every possible thing that could be wrong.
He didn’t need to because if it’s not in what He mentioned as right, then it’s at the very least, not important.
The Bible doesn’t say Jesus didn’t own a golf course. Can we then presume that He did because the Bible doesn’t tell us otherwise?
Only if it isn't in the book of Holy Tradition.
*** Only if it isn’t in the book of Holy Tradition.***
“Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you.” —St. Paul
“If he will not listen to the church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector.” —Jesus
“Be a sinner and sin strongly, but more strongly have faith and rejoice in Christ.” —Martin Luther
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.