English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

true church? Pretty funny, coming from the bunch that brought us the dark ages, sale of indulgences, killed every protestant reformer of the 16th century and prohibited laymen from reading the Bible. When the reformers got their hands on the Bible they found that both Daniel and John (in Revelation) identified the office of the pope as an anti-christ. Hundreds of thousands of catholics fled to protestantism and were persecuted for it. Pope Leo commissioned two jesuits, Robert Bellarmine and Francisco Ribera to deflect the focus of the antichrist story away from the pope. They dreamed up the story of the rapture, a future antichrist at the end of time, and a seven year tribulation. That was dragged over into protestantism by John Darby in 1800, but didn't catch on until Hal Lindsay wrote "The Late Great Planet Earth" in the '70s. LeHay and Jenkins Left Behind came next, making it accepted by 90% of protestants. It has no basis in scripture and is false doctrine.

2007-07-15 09:25:04 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

17 answers

nothing. its in the bible says everything that is going to happen...the end of the world is coming. Jesus is coming soon, now its time for people to wake up and see, read the bible, belive, and change their lives b4 its 2late.

2007-07-15 09:30:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The idea that all revealed truth is to be found in "66 books" is not only not in Scripture, it is contradicted by Scripture (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Timothy 3:15, 2 Peter 1:20-21, 2 Peter 3:16). It is a concept unheard of in the Old Testament, where the authority of those who sat on the Chair of Moses (Matthew 23:2-3) existed. In addition to this, for 400 years, there was no defined canon of "Sacred Scripture" aside from the Old Testament; there was no "New Testament"; there was only Tradition and non-canonical books and letters.




Protestants claim the Bible is the only rule of faith, meaning that it contains all of the material one needs for theology and that this material is sufficiently clear that one does not need apostolic tradition or the Church’s magisterium (teaching authority) to help one understand it. In the Protestant view, the whole of Christian truth is found within the Bible’s pages. Anything extraneous to the Bible is simply non-authoritative, unnecessary, or wrong—and may well hinder one in coming to God.

Catholics, on the other hand, recognize that the Bible does not endorse this view and that, in fact, it is repudiated in Scripture. The true "rule of faith"—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition, as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly

2007-07-17 10:39:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am a real Christian - a Catholic Christian, and I say "Right on Pope Benedict!"

The Catholic Church is the only one that exhibits the Four Marks of the True Church:

The Church Is One (Rom. 12:5, 1 Cor. 10:17, 12:13, CCC 813–822)
Jesus established only one Church, not a collection of differing churches (Lutheran, Baptist, Anglican, and so on). The Bible says the Church is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23–32). Jesus can have but one spouse, and his spouse is the Catholic Church.

His Church also teaches just one set of doctrines, which must be the same as those taught by the apostles (Jude 3). This is the unity of belief to which Scripture calls us (Phil. 1:27, 2:2).

Although some Catholics dissent from officially-taught doctrines, the Church’s official teachers—the pope and the bishops united with him—have never changed any doctrine. Over the centuries, as doctrines are examined more fully, the Church comes to understand them more deeply (John 16:12–13), but it never understands them to mean the opposite of what they once meant.

The Church Is Holy (Eph. 5:25–27, Rev. 19:7–8, CCC 823–829)
By his grace Jesus makes the Church holy, just as he is holy. This doesn’t mean that each member is always holy. Jesus said there would be both good and bad members in the Church (John 6:70), and not all the members would go to heaven (Matt. 7:21–23).

But the Church itself is holy because it is the source of holiness and is the guardian of the special means of grace Jesus established, the sacraments (cf. Eph. 5:26).

The Church Is Catholic (Matt. 28:19–20, Rev. 5:9–10, CCC 830–856)
Jesus’ Church is called catholic ("universal" in Greek) because it is his gift to all people. He told his apostles to go throughout the world and make disciples of "all nations" (Matt. 28:19–20).

For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has carried out this mission, preaching the good news that Christ died for all men and that he wants all of us to be members of his universal family (Gal. 3:28).

Nowadays the Catholic Church is found in every country of the world and is still sending out missionaries to "make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:19).

The Church Jesus established was known by its most common title, "the Catholic Church," at least as early as the year 107, when Ignatius of Antioch used that title to describe the one Church Jesus founded. The title apparently was old in Ignatius’s time, which means it probably went all the way back to the time of the apostles.

The Church Is Apostolic (Eph. 2:19–20, CCC 857–865)
The Church Jesus founded is apostolic because he appointed the apostles to be the first leaders of the Church, and their successors were to be its future leaders. The apostles were the first bishops, and, since the first century, there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral Tradition (2 Tim. 2:2).

These beliefs include the bodily Resurrection of Jesus, the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the forgiveness of sins through a priest, baptismal regeneration, the existence of purgatory, Mary’s special role, and much more —even the doctrine of apostolic succession itself.

Early Christian writings prove the first Christians were thoroughly Catholic in belief and practice and looked to the successors of the apostles as their leaders. What these first Christians believed is still believed by the Catholic Church. No other Church can make that claim.

2007-07-16 04:51:29 · answer #3 · answered by Daver 7 · 0 0

i does not sweat it a lot. Catholics have faith that all and sundry Christians are Christians. they have faith in some thing like 'huge wide awake objector' or some thing. additionally they have faith that different Christian church homes are authentic to a point, for in the event that they weren't, then they'd quit to exist. Catholics could be very proud that they have been between the oldest Christian church homes around, notwithstanding it somewhat isn't something greater suitable than a Yankees fan thinking the Yankees are the excellent. the nice and cozy button is that their are many professional-Catholic and Anti-Catholic human beings accessible. yet as quickly as you sit down and study what Catholics have faith approximately salvation, you will discover it to be very open, in that almost everyone can nonetheless make it to heaven. i wish this became powerful.

2016-09-30 01:33:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed the apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing throughout the centuries, even unto today. The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the leader of the apostles, with the greatest authority, and therefore his successors carry on the greatest authority. The Roman Catholic Church combines this belief with the concept that Peter later became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishops that followed Peter were accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. Apostolic succession, combined with Peter’s supremacy among the apostles, results in the Roman bishop being the supreme authority of the Catholic Church – the Pope.

However, nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of “apostolic succession.” Further, neither is Peter presented as “supreme” over the other apostles. The Apostle Paul, in fact, rebukes Peter when Peter was leading others astray (Galatians 2:11-14). Yes, the Apostle Peter had a prominent role. Yes, perhaps the Apostle Peter was the leader of the apostles (although the Book of Acts records the Apostle Paul and Jesus’ brother James as also having prominent leadership roles). Whatever the case, Peter was not the “commander” or supreme authority over the other apostles. Even if apostolic succession could be demonstrated from Scripture, which it cannot, apostolic succession would not result in Peter’s successors being absolutely supreme over the other apostles’ successors.

Catholics point to Matthias being chosen to replace Judas as the 12th apostle in Acts chapter 1 as an example of apostolic succession. While Matthias did indeed “suceed” Judas as an apostle, this is in no sense an argument for continuing apostolic succession. Matthias being chosen to replace Judas is only an argument for the church replacing ungodly and unfaithful leaders (such as Judas), with godly and faithful leaders (such as Matthias). Nowhere in the New Testament are any of the twelve apostles recorded as passing on their apostolic authority to successors. Nowhere do any of the apostles predict that they will pass on their apostolic authority. No, Jesus ordained the apostles to build the foundation of the church (Ephesians 2:20). What is the foundation of the church that the apostles built? The New Testament – the record of the deeds and teachings of the apostles. The church does not need apostolic successors. The church needs the teachings of the apostles accurately recorded and preserved. And that is exactly what God has provided in His Word (Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 2:15; 4:2).

In short, apostolic succession is not biblical. The concept of apostolic succession is never found in Scripture. What is found in Scripture is that the true church will teach what the Scriptures teach and will compare all doctrines and practices to Scripture in order to determine what is true and right. The Roman Catholic Church claims that a lack of ongoing apostolic authority results in doctrinal confusion and chaos. It is an unfortunate truth (that the apostles acknowledged) that false teachers would arise (2 Peter 2:1). Admittedly, the lack of “supreme authority” amongst non-Catholic churches results in many different interpretations. However, these differences in interpretation are not the result of Scripture being unclear. Rather, they are the result of even non-Catholic Christians carrying on the Catholic tradition of interpreting Scripture in accordance with their own traditions. If Scripture is studied in its entirety and in its proper context, the truth can be easily determined. Doctrinal differences and denominational conflicts are a result of some Christians refusing to agree with what Scripture says – not a result of there being no “supreme authority” to interpret Scripture.

Alignment with Scriptural teaching, not apostolic succession, is the determining factor of the trueness of a church. What is mentioned in Scripture is the idea that the Word of God was to be the guide that the church was to follow (Acts 20:32). It is Scripture that was to be the infallible measuring stick for teaching and practice (2 Timothy 3:16-17). It is the Scriptures that teachings are to be compared with (Acts 17:10-12). Apostolic authority was passed on through the writings of the apostles, not through apostolic succession.

Recommended Resource: The Gospel According to Rome: Comparing Catholic Tradition and The Word of God by James McCarthy.

2007-07-15 09:28:26 · answer #5 · answered by Freedom 7 · 0 0

You know Catholic was the first Christianity and the protestants all spawn from the Catholic Church. So the Pope is right in a way.

2007-07-15 09:28:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Here is the full text of the new document that states nothing new: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html

Most Christian denominations believe that each of them is the fullest version of the Church of Christ.

While the Catholic Church also believes that she is "the highest exemplar" of the mystery that is the Church of Christ, she does not claim that non-Catholic Churches are not truly Christian. The Catholic Church teaches:

Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements.

Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church.

All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him.

For more information, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 819: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt3art9p3.htm#819

With love in Christ.

2007-07-15 13:48:16 · answer #7 · answered by imacatholic2 7 · 0 1

very nice commentary. but, according to you, there are only 10% true Christians who can answer your question.

the RC church proclaims this once or twice in every generation. it is just part of their deal.

could the pope be the anti-christ? who knows? what about the president of the US or Hugo Chavez? we won't ever really know because the anti-christ is not real, either.

2007-07-15 09:31:08 · answer #8 · answered by yarn whore 5 · 0 1

We are expecting a visit just like the one he had with Turkey for attacking some 16 century moslem.

But we don't tie bombs to our children, so he probably won't come.

2007-07-15 09:48:15 · answer #9 · answered by Thomas Paine 5 · 0 0

Hey, don't forget about the pedophile thing they started. But it's OK . They are paying their victims back a half a billion dollars to settles. That will give them a dollar a piece! I all the victims came forward that is what it would be. " You will know them by their fruits."

2007-07-15 09:32:06 · answer #10 · answered by George 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers