Roman Catholicism: The One True Church?

Rapture Ready ^ | Stephen Meehan

[Old Yeller]

For years, growing up as a Roman Catholic, we were taught that we were members of the one true church. It was impressed upon us regularly by the parish priest during Mass while giving his homily; by the nuns all throughout my Catholic parochial school years of second through seventh grade.

It was impressed upon us during our preparation to receive for the first time the sacraments of Penance, Communion and Confirmation. And while attending CCD classes all the way through high school. (CCD is the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, an association established at Rome in 1562 for the purpose of giving religious education, normally designed for children.)

It was an established fact that we understood and we never questioned the validity of it. And to be honest, it was a matter of pride, that we were privileged enough to be members of the correct church, while all others had belonged to something else that didn’t quite measure up to the status of the Roman Catholic Church.

After all, how could it be possible that Roman Catholicism is not the one true church?

Look at what Rome has to offer: It has the priests, the nuns; the bishops; the cardinals; and of course, the Pope. They have the Sacraments; the statues; the holy water; the incense; the Stations of the Cross; the Eucharist - in which Chris supposedly physically manifests Himself into the wafer after the consecration by the priest during the Mass; the Marian apparitions—which appear mainly to Roman Catholics.

And they have the Vatican, where the Vicar of Christ (who they believe is Christ’s representative on earth), governs the faithful and makes infallible proclamations and doctrine. How can this not be the one true church? No other organization on the face of the earth comes close to offering to its flock what Rome provides for its faithful.

But, of course, to be true, one must adhere to what has been established as truth and not teach or practice what is contrary to the truth. We read in Scripture a few passages that declare what is truth and what is not. Jesus proclaimed in John 14:6:

“I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me.”

[smvoice]

Uh, I think God used “loved the world” because His plan for man was made from the foundation of the world, and in the case of this present age, “from before the foundation of the world.” Ephesians. Before He even created this earth, the plan was in place. That’s why He says “loved”.

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “Why would Jesus say, “For God so loved the world” - past tense? Why would He not have said, “For God so loves the world” - present tense? Would it not make more sense, if God does indeed love the world?” <<

When Yeshua said those words, the giving of his son was a past event, or Yeshua would not have been walking the Earth in a mortal body.
.

[rbmillerjr]

I believe the aforementioned writer has refuted extremely well, those questions that were relevant to what he wrote on. He was bombarded with many questions, many which were not relevant to what he had previously written.

To ignore or omit is not to accept a contrary notion.

Your question: “James insists that Christians must keep the OC Law, but Peter and Paul disagree. Please tell me the official RC church position on this conundrum. “

Your debate is not with the Catholic Church but with God. God’s Word does not contradict itself. Any attempt to do so should be reconsidered. There may be different audiences at different times, ad thus different things stressed. However, in totality, The Word of God stands as Truth.

Specifically regarding the Catholic Church and the issue you question :

CCC 121 “ The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. It’s books are divinely inspired and retain permanent value, for the Old Covenant has never been revoked “

The Old Covenant has been surpassed, but not revoked. The New is the source of all salvation even for those who adhere to the old. Jesus came to fulfill.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>“James insists that Christians must keep the OC Law, but Peter and Paul disagree.”<

>>>That is a categorically false statement.<<<

I addressed this in post #389 and in a previous thread (On the Infallibility of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium). The early Church was originally a sect of Judaism and kept the OC Law for about the first two decades until the council of Ac.15 where it was abandoned.

But I do not think you are addressing the discussion of this thread. It is about the validity of Roman Catholicism as the "one church". If your argument is that RCs should keep the Law, go tell that to the RCs. If you want to discuss all Christians keeping the Law, start a new thread.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>Uh, I think God used “loved the world” because His plan for man was made from the foundation of the world, and in the case of this present age, “from before the foundation of the world.” Ephesians. Before He even created this earth, the plan was in place. That’s why He says “loved”.<<<

The word katabole often translated as "foundation" actually means overthrow. This refers to the downfall of the first creation age. The plan never even came into being until it became necessary at the overthrow. By then God wasn't loving very much - He destroyed the whole earth. It is because you do not understand the sequence of events between the original creation and the recreation of earth that you do not understand why Christ said, "For God so loved the world" - past tense. Since you seem to dispute the first creation age, I look forward to you addressing the scriptural evidence that I have provided to support it in this thread? See posts #491 #494 #496 Then we can discuss "foundation" more fully.

[smvoice]

Because the early church was the Messianic Kingdom Church, made up of followers of The Messiah. Which included John the Baptist, Matt. Mark Luke John, the little flock, those who heard Peter's Pentecost sermon, believed, repented and were baptized. All built on the fact that Christ was God's Anointed Son, chosen to occupy the throne in the Millenial Kingdom. Jesus as rightful King and Son of God, was to be the very foundation of the Messianic church and this is how believers recognized the Lord at that time. It was Peter's confession of Jesus as "the Christ (Heb. Messiah, Anointed One), the Son of the living God that Christ began to build this church. And it was built until Israel as a nation was blinded (temporarily) and set aside because of unbelief and rejection of Christ as their Messiah. At that point the building of the Messianic church could not go on to completion. God is showing Israel that her house will not stand unless she recognizes Jesus as His Son and her King.

Enter the church of this present age: the Church the Body of Christ. It was a secret which Peter and the eleven knew nothing about when they followed Christ as King and offered His kingdom to Israel at Pentecost.

We, as members of the Church the Body of Christ now know Him in a different way. Whereas Peter and the eleven knew Him as the King to reign on earth, we know him as the glorified Head of the Body (Eph. 1:19-23). "Wherefore HENCEFORTH.." Paul states in 2 Cor. 5:16. Meaning from this point on. Meaning a change in what had previously been happening.

Before Paul was saved, men were expected to trust in Jesus as "the Christ, the Son of the living God," the King to reign as God on David's throne. But with the raising up of Paul Israel's rejection of Christ was assumed and "Wherefore HENCEFORTH" we trust the rejected King as our glorified Lord and Savior.The Messianic Church was a prophesied church. The plans and specifications for THAT church are found in the Old Testament Scriptures.

The plans and specifications for THIS church (the Church the Body of Christ) were "kept secret since the world began" (Rom. 16:25), "Hid from ages and from generations (Col. 1:26), "in other ages...not made known" (Eph. 3:5) but NOW revealed to and through the Apostle Paul.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>God’s Word does not contradict itself.<<<

Thank you for making my argument for me. The epistle of James is not canonical.

[smvoice]

I do NOT dispute the first creation age at all. I absolutely believe it. God created it, it literally went to H*ll when Satan rebelled and was kicked out of His heavenly position. The earth reaped the complete destruction that Satan brought to it. God destroyed it and began again. But Before He began again, He had a plan for this man, Adam that He was going to create. “From the foundation of the world” and “Before the foundation of the world”. That was when the earth was RECREATED, not created.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>I do NOT dispute the first creation age at all. I absolutely believe it. God created it, it literally went to H*ll when Satan rebelled and was kicked out of His heavenly position. The earth reaped the complete destruction that Satan brought to it. God destroyed it and began again. But Before He began again, He had a plan for this man, Adam that He was going to create. “From the foundation of the world” and “Before the foundation of the world”. That was when the earth was RECREATED, not created.<<<

Then why are you arguing as though you don’t believe in a first creation age? That is what Christ was referring to.

When He said, “For God so loved the world” - past tense - He was referring to the first creation age. The Greek grammar is that of an aorist verb. This means it is speaking of a specific event - the first creation age.

[smvoice]

I didn’t realize I WAS arguing as though I didn’t believe in a first creation age. I understand what you’re saying “for God so loved the world” meaning the first creation. I was thinking of the RE-creation that He was talking about. Before THAT re-created world was begun, He had already planned what this re-created world would be comprised of. Mankind. And He had a plan for mankind before He created them or the world they were going to occupy. I meant no harm.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>I didn’t realize I WAS arguing as though I didn’t believe in a first creation age. I understand what you’re saying “for God so loved the world” meaning the first creation. I was thinking of the RE-creation that He was talking about. Before THAT re-created world was begun, He had already planned what this re-created world would be comprised of. Mankind. And He had a plan for mankind before He created them or the world they were going to occupy. I meant no harm.<<<

Allow me to summarize:

Breaking down the Greek grammar of "For God so loved the world" tells us that Christ was referring to "the world" as "of all humanity, but especially of believers, as the object of God's love" - A Greek- English Lexicon of the New testament and Other Christian Literature, Third Edition

The verb is aorist, meaning it is referring to a specific past event.

The only specific past event when "all humanity" could have been loved by God can only be the first creation age.

[smvoice]

Thank you. What do you think was on the first created earth? I’ve heard many ideas, and am interested in yours.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>Thank you. What do you think was on the first created earth? I’ve heard many ideas, and am interested in yours.<<<

Thanks for your interest. I have posted in this thread about the first creation age as an argument against the OP argument of "one church". I don't think I should divert the thread into further explanations that are not related to the OP.

However, I have written two books that address the first creation age: MetaChristianity II - Unlocking Salvation Bible Mysteries and MetaChristianity III - Unlocking Creation Bible Mysteries. The first book in the series is completely free. The following eight books offer the first 15% of the text as a sample for free. For a quick look I suggest the Online Reader that opens in your browser and requires no download.

[smvoice]

Thanks so much for the info. I’m on my way to that link after I finish this post. And BTW: congratulations on being published! I can’t wait to read them. The first creation is the most INTERESTING part of Bible study, IMO. Thanks again! smvoice

[DeprogramLiberalism]

Self-published ebooks, but thanks anyway.

I too find the first creation age fascinating - and the second and the third.

[smvoice]

Maybe one day, God willing, we can get into that here. It would be fascinating and you’re just the type of person to lead the discussion (I just read the snippet on your website) :) So of course I want to know more. MORE I tell you!

regards,

smvoice

[rbmillerjr]

“Thank you for making my argument for me. The epistle of James is not canonical.”

Anybody espousing that belief is a heretic.

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>Maybe one day, God willing, we can get into that here. It would be fascinating and you’re just the type of person to lead the discussion (I just read the snippet on your website) :) So of course I want to know more. MORE I tell you!<<<

I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I advise that you curb it. You are going to have your socks shocked off in the first book. You may not like some what you discover. Few people can accept wholesale challenges to their belief systems.

[smvoice]

I’ll take my chances ;)

[DeprogramLiberalism]

>>>“Thank you for making my argument for me. The epistle of James is not canonical.”

Anybody espousing that belief is a heretic.<<<

Thank you for the compliment.

"A heretic is a man who sees with his own eyes." Gotthold Ephraim Lessing