RELIGION....(part 2)

[shoeless_rebel]

---

bro, i don't have a religion... but i think im a far better person to my neighbors and to myself and far less a "sinner" if we base it on ur 10 commandments compared to alot of devote christians, muslim or whatever. u say that it's a failing mark not to have a religion if incase there is a god... does that mean that i'm going to hell if incase there is really a god?

get my point? do really need a religion to be saved?

"In case there is a God?" You surroundings could prove to you that there is a God.

you don't have to tell me that... believe me. i've heard all of it before and i was not enough to convince me. but i respect you and m not saying anything bad about ur belief.

[Cardinal Bunal]

CONTRAPOSITIVES

There is no salvation outside the Catholic church.
Those who are outside who have not heard the Gospel of Christ (according to Rome) MAY be saved. (Rom. 2: 10 - 12)
But those who are INSIDE and of the Catholic church participating in all the requirements of the clergy have just as much the same CHANCES of being saved.
Ergo, those who are inside are NOT even assured of that salvation!

The Scriptures write, that the obedience to God's commands is essential, but what brings ASSURANCE Eternal Life per se is belief in the Son of God (Jn 3: 16) and that God raised Him from the dead (Rom. 10: 9).......

Plus, there are recapitulations of what a follower of Christ must do so he may know that he has eternal life. - 1 Jn 5: 13

Yet why does the system of Rome INSIST that there is no assurance of salvation? Even the Scriptures say otherwise in John 10: 27 - 28

This leaves us only with 2 options:

1. That the leaders of the Roman Catholic church are deliberately nullifying what the Scriptures say about salvation.
2. ex cathedra is NOT infallible after all, meaning the Holy Spirit has not been preserving the papacy for the millenia that has gone by, and it's foundation falls apart.



-----

While good works are essential and they justify one's faith (James 2: 18, 22) they are NOT the basis of salvation (Eph. 2: 8, 9, Rom. 11: 6 ) rather they are what we are created to do (Eph. 2: 10) and it is what the man of God should be zealous to carry out. (Titus 2: 14).

[t3ChNo™]

OT: na unsa nmn ni oi........

[lightbringer]

Uh... where? And once you cite that verse, please tell me exactly what that Word is supposed to be? No KJV there, bubba. In nfact, no specific collection of books (a Bible) is mentioned at all! Your plentiful words DO NOT CITE ANY PROOF from the Bible. You claim there's proof? Where? Just claiming there's proof is NOT proof. You have to show the evidence. AND YOU HAVEN'T. So, when will you cite the exact verses? Maybe NEVER? I thought so.

You seem to have more than a heart problem. You have an arrogance problem.

Your stupidity has grown each day! You want an exact verse.. and exact line in the Bible that says that "The KJV is the preserved of God..." Well lemme ask you this.. Tell me in the Bible where "That the Catholic church is the one and only true church" Nowhere dimwit! Oh..I think I just gave you 5-10 verses and you still can't understand them.. poor soul! Forever blind!

John 5:38
And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

Rail at that if you like! Rejecting God's word simply means rejecting Christ.

Papal Infallibility
http://www.catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp

Lies. Anyone here.. if you're reading these articles..these are lies.

Cathechism? Hah! Pervert! Well I'm glad out of this so called "holy institution"

Since Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church (Matt. 16:18b), this means that his Church can never pass out of existence. But if the Church ever apostasized by teaching heresy, then it would cease to exist; because it would cease to be Jesus’ Church. Thus the Church cannot teach heresy, meaning that anything it solemnly defines for the faithful to believe is true. This same reality is reflected in the Apostle Paul’s statement that the Church is "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15). If the Church is the foundation of religious truth in this world, then it is God’s own spokesman. As Christ told his disciples: "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16).

You're already teaching heresy!
haha.. read down further on 1 Timothy chapter 4. Of course...Paul was talking to the New Testament Church.. not The Catholic Church! And the letter was for Timothy. A young pastor or "bishop" (of course you don't know what means!)


1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
6 If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.
7 But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.
8 For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.
9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation.
10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
11 These things command and teach.
12 Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.
13 Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.
14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
15 Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.
16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.



Now who's the bastard now? Certainly not the Bible!

[lightbringer]

bro, i don't have a religion... but i think im a far better person to my neighbors and to myself and far less a "sinner" if we base it on ur 10 commandments compared to alot of devote christians, muslim or whatever. u say that it's a failing mark not to have a religion if incase there is a god... does that mean that i'm going to hell if incase there is really a god?

get my point? do really need a religion to be saved?

"In case there is a God?" You surroundings could prove to you that there is a God.

you don't have to tell me that... believe me. i've heard all of it before and i was not enough to convince me. but i respect you and m not saying anything bad about ur belief.

Then I pray that one way or another you'd come to know the truth.Â* Before it is too late...
Til then.. "let God be true and every man a liar..."Â* Good day!

[soulshocked]

@lightbringer

Settle down now...you're class is waiting for you now! hehe!
Fiery eh?

Well about the Cathechism.. Just compare it to the 10 commandments and see what verse they'd omit in it...
Well bruh! Those were the old days...

You know why people follow the vain traditions of men? Can't take God's word. That's why they teach strange and false doctrines. I feel sorry for those who are faithful ones who thought with all their hearts accept these false teachings as truths. The Bible is much more than a religious guide to follow! When any person teaches contrary to God's preserved word, that person is wrong, and God's word is right! If can accept these terms then read down further with a open heart. Search the scriptures to clarify not to look for loopholes!

The Authority of the Written Word

The Roman Catholic Church has given tradition, which weight when establishing and practicing her beliefs, yet the Bible clearly warns against this. In Matthew 15:3, the Lord Jesus Christ says “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?� Paul says, in Colossians 2:8 “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.� Catholic writings are filled with phrases like “the Church teaches� or “tradition teaches� or “the Church has traditionally taught�. In light of the above Scripture, shouldn’t true Christian writings be filled with phrases like “the Bible says� or “according to the Scriptures�?
Friend, if you are following God’s pure words or are you following man’s tradition? Perhaps you’re thinking. “This is anti-Catholic hate literature!� No, actually, this tract is based on God’s word. If you doubt it, please check the references for yourself. What have you got to lose?
Even when Rome profess to believe the Bible, we must remember that the Catholic Bible is very different from the written word of God. The Catholic Church includes several books in their Old Testament that are not God’s word. The Catholic Council of Trent of 1541 place a curse upon everyone who does not accept the Apocrypha as inspired Old Testament Scripture (See Catholic Encyclopedia). In doing so, the famous council pronounced a curse upon Jesus Christ and the New Testament writers!
In Matthew 23:35, Jesus said that the Old Testament began with Abel (The Book of Genesis) and ended with Zecharias (II Chronicles). Since the Hebrew Old Testament ends with II Chronicles, there is no room left for the Apocryphal books. This explains why the Lord Jesus and the New Testament writers never refer to the Apocrypha or quote it. These writings were not accepted as Scripture. So Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, John, Luke and the rest are officially cursed by the Roman Catholic Church.
Lest someone claim that this is no longer a Catholic belief, we refer the reader to page 61 of the Catholic publication, Faith of our Fathers, by Cardinal Gibbons:

If only one instance could be given in which the Church ceased to teach a doctrine which had been previously held, that single instance would be the deathblow of her infallibility.

So there is no absolute Sole Authority in the Catholic Church. There are dual authorities: tradition and the Catholic bible, which is entirely unscriptural (Isa. 8:20, Mat. 4:4, Col. 2:8, Mat. 15:3). God’ word alone should be the Sole Authority of any Christian institution.


The Infallibility of the Pope

Since 1870, with Pope Pius IX, the Catholic Church has taught the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. The Vatican Council then declared that

The Vatican Council has defined as “a divinely revealed dogma� that the “Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra – that is, when in the exercise his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church – is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church’s consent� (Catholic Encyclopedia)

On June 20, 1984, Pope Leo XIII was bold enough to claim that the Popes “hold upon the earth the place of God Almighty� Of course, this was nothing new because the Vatican Council of 1870 had already proclaimed that:

The Pope is Christ in office, Christ in jurisdiction and power…we bow down before thy voice, O Pius, as before the voice of Christ, the God of truth; in clinging to thee, we cling to Christ. (Babylon Mystery Religion, p. 103)

The first being to ever liken himself to God was Lucifer (Isa. 14:12-15), and the last will be the Antichrist (II Thes. 2:3-4), so the Pope isn’t in very good company. King Herod, who also followed the Roman religion, was killed by God for allowing people to credit him with infallibility (Acts 12:21-23). God’s word is the only infallible Authority in Christianity. No man is infallible. The Bible record is clear about that:

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar…� (Rom. 3:4) To the law and to the testimony: if they speak no according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.� (Isa. 8:20) Surely men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie: to be laid in the balance, they are altogether lighter than vanity.� (Psa. 62:9)

Friend, who will you believe, God’s word or the Catholic Church?

[Cardinal Bunal]

Soulshocked I hope you keep posting here!

Aha naman to silang Von-X! og Meganda oi......

[mannyamador]

There is no salvation outside the Catholic church.
Those who are outside who have not heard the Gospel of Christ (according to Rome) MAY be saved. (Rom. 2: 10 - 12)
But those who are INSIDE and of the Catholic church participating in all the requirements of the clergy have just as much the same CHANCES of being saved.
Ergo, those who are inside are NOT even assured of that salvation!

Such a creative caricature of Catholic doctrine. That's called a STRAW MAN argument; a logical error.

Truly a fine example of attacking doctrines you don't understand. That's called PREJUDICE

The Scriptures write, that the obedience to God's commands is essential, but what brings ASSURANCE Eternal Life per se is belief in the Son of God (Jn 3: 16) and that God raised Him from the dead (Rom. 10: 9)

An interpretation contrary to Epistle of James.

Yet why does the system of Rome INSIST that there is no assurance of salvation? Even the Scriptures say otherwise in John 10: 27 - 28

Clear evidence you DON'T understand Catholic doictrine. But I think that "misunderstanding" is quite deliberate. You can't find any real argument against Catholic doctrine so you caricature it, make a straw man, and attack the caricature. Not very honest at all.

There IS assurance of salvation, but not in personal interpretation or in faith alone. It is to be found in serving Christ, most especially in the Church.

[mannyamador]

Oh..I think I just gave you 5-10 verses and you still can't understand them.. poor soul! Forever blind!

No, you gave me 5-10 verses that said absolutely NOTHING about the Bible being the ONLY and FINAL authority, much less any indication whatsoever that any one translation (and the KJV is jsut a translation) should be considered as the only and only final authority.

Calling people names and pretending that it amounts to proof is the true stupidity.

John 5:38
And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

Where does this even say here that the Bible (or any translation of it) is the SOLE and FINAL auithority? Nowhere? I thought so.

Lies. Anyone here.. if you're reading these articles..these are lies.
Cathechism? Hah! Pervert

Idiotic perosnal attacks do not an argument make. You have to REFUTE the sound arguments herein. But I guess that's beyond your capacity.

Of course...Paul was talking to the New Testament Church.. not The Catholic Church! And the letter was for Timothy. A young pastor or "bishop" (of course you don't know what means!)

And we're supposed to take your fanatical PERSONAL INTERPRETATION as authoritative? We're not that dumb.

Now who's the bastard now? Certainly not the Bible!

Not ALL Bibles. But, certainly the KJV is a BASTARD BIBLE. It has lots of errors in it!

Ah well, looks like your brain has run out of steam, and all your fanatical and pathetic attempts at insult can't hide it.

Come on now, you claim the Bible is the SOLE and FINAL authority? So pretty pleeeaaase, PROVE IT FROM THE BIBLE. You claim the KJV is the true Word of God, PROVE IT FROM THE BIBLE! Surely you can give me even one teeny weeny little verse that states this teaching? Pretty puhleezzz?

Oh, but you can't? Well now that contradicts your claim that the Bible is the SOLE and FINAL authority since you have to find some other source to back up your midless claims. Tsk, tsk, tsk!

And while you're at it, maybe you can also prove to us how you know that the canon of the KJV is the true canon. How do you know what books should be in the Bible? PROVE YOUR CANON FROM THE BIBLE!

Oh... but you CAN'T find a list in the Binle that specifies what books are supposed to be in it, can you? Well, then how do you know what's supposed to be in it? Some OTHER authority perhaps? Well, that totally sinks your claim that the Bible is the SOLE and FINAL AUTHORITY!

Try thinking rationally. It will lessen the froth dripping from your mouth.

[mannyamador]

Whose Bible Is It, Anyway?
By Karl Keating

Most Protestants are at a loss when asked how they know that the 66 books in their Bibles belong in it.
(They are at an even greater loss to explain why the seven additional books appearing in Catholic Bibles are missing
from theirs.) For them the Bible “just is.� They take it as a given. It never occurs to most of them that they ought
to justify its existence.

The most overlooked part of the Bible, apologetically speaking, is the table of contents.

It does more than just tell us the pages on which the constituent books begin. It tells us that the Bible is a collection
of books, and that implies a collector. The identity of the collector is what chiefly distinguishes the Protestant from
the Catholic.

Douglas Wilson knows this. Writing in Credenda Agenda, a periodical espousing the Reformed faith, he notes that
“the problem with contemporary Protestants is that they have no doctrine of the table of contents. With the approach
that is popular in conservative Evangelical circles, one simply comes to the Bible by means of an epistemological lurch.
The Bible 'just is,' and any questions about how it got here are dismissed as a nuisance. But time passes, the questions
remain unanswered, the silence becomes awkward, and conversions of thoughtful Evangelicals to Rome proceed apace.�

Most Protestants are at a loss when asked how they know that the 66 books in their Bibles belong in it. (They are at
an even greater loss to explain why the seven additional books appearing in Catholic Bibles are missing from theirs.) For
them the Bible “just is.� They take it as a given. It never occurs to most of them that they ought to justify its existence.
All Christians agree that the books that make up the Bible are inspired, meaning that God somehow guided the sacred
authors to write all of, and only, what he wished. They wrote, most of them, without any awareness that they were
being moved by God. As they wrote, God used their natural talents and their existing ways of speech. Each book of the
Bible is an image not only of the divine Inspirer but of the all-too-human author. So how do we know whether Book A is
inspired while Book B is not? A few unsophisticated Protestants are satisfied with pointing to the table of contents, as
though that modern addition somehow validates the inspiration of the 66 books, but many Protestants simply shrug and
admit that they don’t know why they know the Bible consists of inspired books and only inspired books. Some Protestants
claim that they do have a way of knowing, a kind of internal affirmation that is obtained as they read the text.

Wilson cites the Westminster Confession -- the 1647 Calvinist statement of faith -- which says that the Holy Spirit provides
"full persuasion and assurance" regarding Scripture to those who are converted. "The converted,� says Wilson, “are in turn
enabled to see the other abundant evidences, which include the testimony of the Church.� But the “testimony of the
Church� cannot be definitive or binding since the Church may err, according to Protestant lights. (Protestants do not believe
the Church is infallible when it teaches.) What really counts is the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. Without it, the
Protestant is at a loss -- but, even with it, he is at a loss. When young Mormon missionaries come to your door, they
ask you to accept a copy of the Book of Mormon. You hesitate, but they say that all they want is for you to read the text
and ask God to give you a sign that the text is inspired. They call this sign the “burning in the bosom." If you feel uplifted,
moved, prodded toward the good or true -- if you feel “inspired,� in the colloquial rather than theological sense of that
word -- as you read the Book of Mormon, then that is supposed to be proof that Joseph Smith’s text is from God.

A moment’s thought will show that the “burning in the bosom� proves too much. It proves not only that the Book of
Mormon is inspired but that your favorite secular poetry is inspired. You can get a similar feeling anytime you read an
especially good novel (or, for some people, even a potboiler) or a thrilling history or an intriguing biography. Are all these
books inspired? Of course not, and that shows that the “burning in the bosom� may be a good propaganda device but
is a poor indicator of divine authorship.

Back to the Protestant. The “full persuasion and assurance� of the Westminster Confession is not readily distinguishable
from Mormonism’s “burning in the bosom.� You read a book of the Bible and are “inspired� by it -- and that proves its
inspiration. The sequence is easy enough to experience in reading the Gospels, but I suspect no one ever has felt the
same thing when reading the two books of Chronicles. They read like dry military statistics because that is what they
largely are.

Neither the simplistic table-of-contents approach nor the more sophisticated Westminster Confession approach will do.
The Christian needs more than either if he is to know for certain that the books of the Bible come ultimately from God.
He needs an authoritative collector to affirm their inspiration. That collector must be something other
than an internal feeling. It must be an authoritative -- and, yes, infallible Church.

Keating, Karl. “Whose Bible Is It, Anyway?� National Catholic Register. (November 12-18, 2000).