- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What do you think of when you think 'Catholicism'?
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:07 am to EthanL
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:07 am to EthanL
Catholicism....To me, that word represents a massive group of people respected and admired for charity and faith.
I also think of the Pope and the influence of John Paul II in world events of his time.
I also think of the Pope and the influence of John Paul II in world events of his time.
This post was edited on 9/24/14 at 12:11 am
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:08 am to EthanL
quote:
Tell me Rolltide, what carries more weight in the Catholic Church...the bible, or the dogma?
That's a loaded question to be honest.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:09 am to EthanL
quote:
Let's just say I had an experience I'll never forget, and we left 'the church'.
So because some pederast priest touched you, now you feel the need to denigrate all Catholics and every aspect of the religion?
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:12 am to Wild Thang
Rolltide, in bringing up '23 other Gospels', attempted to say that the Catholic Church decided which Gospels were included in the bible.
I'm telling him that Luke alluded to other 'accounts' of Jesus life...and then several decades later, John wrote an account that followed the exact same timeline and series of events as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. When you have 4 accounts harmonizing together, with no contradictions, and even complementing each other with details, than all the other accounts, which didn't even agree with secular history can be marked as fraudulent. A layman could spot it
I'm telling him that Luke alluded to other 'accounts' of Jesus life...and then several decades later, John wrote an account that followed the exact same timeline and series of events as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. When you have 4 accounts harmonizing together, with no contradictions, and even complementing each other with details, than all the other accounts, which didn't even agree with secular history can be marked as fraudulent. A layman could spot it
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:14 am to EthanL
quote:
The last surviving apostle, John, certified the 4 Gospels we have today, not the Catholic Church.
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were never disputed by early Christians. I never said they were. I merely said that, in addition to the 4 gospels included in our Bible today, Christians were also reading from 23 other gospels which were NOT included in the Bible. The so-called Gospel of Peter was being read at liturgy as late as 190 AD. On top of that, you have writings from early Church Fathers mentioning the Acts of John, the Gospel of Thomas, the Acts of Thomas, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Acts of Paul, the Epistle of Clement to the Romans, and many more as being read at services throughout all of Christianity in the first few centuries of the faith.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:15 am to John McClane
quote:
So because some pederast priest touched you, now you feel the need to denigrate all Catholics and every aspect of the religion?
Furthermore, since that shite isn't true, he decided to study theology after the fact?
Lets get real here people.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:16 am to EthanL
quote:But who decided they were fraudulent? You keep dodging the question.
I'm telling him that Luke alluded to other 'accounts' of Jesus life...and then several decades later, John wrote an account that followed the exact same timeline and series of events as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. When you have 4 accounts harmonizing together, with no contradictions, and even complementing each other with details, than all the other accounts, which didn't even agree with secular history can be marked as fraudulent. A layman could spot it
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:18 am to EthanL
quote:
When you have 4 accounts harmonizing together, with no contradictions, and even complementing each other with details, than all the other accounts, which didn't even agree with secular history can be marked as fraudulent. A layman could spot it
And you know this how?
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:22 am to Wild Thang
If he actually read the writings of the early Church Fathers he would find that the canon of scripture was never so cut and dry.
It wasn't until 382 AD, more than 300 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, that an official canon of scripture was put together by the Church. This canon of scripture was read over and given the stamp of approval by Pope Damasus I.
We don't know who wrote the Book of Hebrews and scripture never tells us which books are inspired and which are not. So how do we trust that they are? Because the Catholic Church tells us they are.
I'll leave you with a quote from the legendary St. Augustine (354-430):
It wasn't until 382 AD, more than 300 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, that an official canon of scripture was put together by the Church. This canon of scripture was read over and given the stamp of approval by Pope Damasus I.
We don't know who wrote the Book of Hebrews and scripture never tells us which books are inspired and which are not. So how do we trust that they are? Because the Catholic Church tells us they are.
I'll leave you with a quote from the legendary St. Augustine (354-430):
quote:
"I should not believe the Gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church."
This post was edited on 9/24/14 at 12:26 am
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:25 am to John McClane
quote:
quote: Let's just say I had an experience I'll never forget, and we left 'the church'. So because some pederast priest touched you, now you feel the need to denigrate all Catholics and every aspect of the religion?
I went to confession when I was 8, almost 9. I came with the same old BS, made up some stuff; I literally lied about lies lol. The man of faith on the other side decided to ask some probing questions. At first, not too bad. 'Have you kissed a girl' etc. not the stuff I would ask, but hey, I figured he was a priest, so whatever.
You can guess where this went. He asked if I had had sex, did I masturbate, was I attracted to boys, had anyone ever touched me in private areas. Basically, under the guise of confession, he was asking explicit, and describing explicit sexual acts, to an 8-tear old boy. I remember wetting my pants and my Mom being so mad at wanting to know what bad things I confessed, and hadn't told her that made me soil my clothes in confession. I guess she thought I had stolen from her or something.
When I told her the different things, acts, and suggestions the priest had made, all I know is she went back up there, and we never went there again.
This post was edited on 9/24/14 at 12:40 am
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:38 am to JazzyJeff
Jazzy Jeff, if four accounts are describing and talking about the same person, but a fifth account is saying 'he had 5 children' with no children to be found, or a 6th account is saying 'he had 3 wives' with no wives anywhere, and yet another recounts an entire history across the globe, contradicting events between 29-33 CE...
...what would you conclude?
It is very easy to make up a story. It is next to impossible for 4 different men to write accounts of the same man, with the same important events, and complimentary details. Your mother, your brother, your best friend, and your wife may all have different accounts about your life. But core details will remain the same.
I don't and would never advise anyone to read the BS accounts out there. Most of them are lost ignominiously to history. But the ones you will find,myou will be quick to call BS immediately. It's largely nonsense
...what would you conclude?
It is very easy to make up a story. It is next to impossible for 4 different men to write accounts of the same man, with the same important events, and complimentary details. Your mother, your brother, your best friend, and your wife may all have different accounts about your life. But core details will remain the same.
I don't and would never advise anyone to read the BS accounts out there. Most of them are lost ignominiously to history. But the ones you will find,myou will be quick to call BS immediately. It's largely nonsense
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:51 am to RollTide1987
quote:
We don't know who wrote the Book of Hebrews and scripture never tells us which books are inspired and which are not. So how do we trust that they are? Because the Catholic Church tells us they are.
The book of Hebrews was written by the Apostle Paul.
The writer was in Italy an was associated with Timothy, who also had been imprisoned in Rome, with the writer, but got an early release (Hebrews 13:23,24).
The book of Romans was preceded by it, again Italy.
Paul was addressing the Hebrews, or Jews, so his argument and style of writing would have been different than when he was writing to the Gentiles in many of his other letters.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:54 am to EthanL
quote:And yet you still don't answer the question.
Jazzy Jeff, if four accounts are describing and talking about the same person, but a fifth account is saying 'he had 5 children' with no children to be found, or a 6th account is saying 'he had 3 wives' with no wives anywhere, and yet another recounts an entire history across the globe, contradicting events between 29-33 CE...
...what would you conclude?
It is very easy to make up a story. It is next to impossible for 4 different men to write accounts of the same man, with the same important events, and complimentary details. Your mother, your brother, your best friend, and your wife may all have different accounts about your life. But core details will remain the same.
I don't and would never advise anyone to read the BS accounts out there. Most of them are lost ignominiously to history. But the ones you will find,myou will be quick to call BS immediately. It's largely nonsense
Posted on 9/24/14 at 12:57 am to EthanL
quote:
I went to confession when I was 8, almost 9. I came with the same old BS, made up some stuff; I literally lied about lies lol. The man of faith on the other side decided to ask some probing questions. At first, not too bad. 'Have you kissed a girl' etc. not the stuff I would ask, but hey, I figured he was a priest, so whatever.
You can guess where this went. He asked if I had had sex, did I masturbate, was I attracted to boys, had anyone ever touched me in private areas. Basically, under the guise of confession, he was asking explicit, and describing explicit sexual acts, to an 8-tear old boy. I remember wetting my pants and my Mom being so mad at wanting to know what bad things I confessed, and hadn't told her that made me soil my clothes in confession. I guess she thought I had stolen from her or something.
When I told her the different things, acts, and suggestions the priest had made, all I know is she went back up there, and we never went there again.
I am sorry that happened to you if true. I really am.
It still points to the fact man is not perfect. Bad people are bad regardless wether they hide behind religion.
You can hold grudges, and I can see why(if true) But, most of your racist posts make me skeptical of you.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 1:06 am to EthanL
quote:
The book of Hebrews was written by the Apostle Paul.
There is no verifiable proof that Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews. Many early Church Fathers, including St. Jerome, doubted the Pauline authorship. Why?
1. It differs considerably from the style of his other letters.
2. It isn't signed by St. Paul. He makes his authorship clear in the other letters.
Some of the Early Fathers attributed it to St. Barnabas, but there is nothing in the text itself to corroborate that theory.
Bottom line, there is no concrete evidence linking the Letter to the Hebrews to the pen of St. Paul. Guess whose word we rely on when it comes to the authorship of Hebrews.
The Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church tells us that Paul wrote Hebrews and therefore the Catholic Church tells us that Hebrews is divinely inspired.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 1:22 am to RollTide1987
That power corrupts.
And the Catholic church continues to show us that.
over and over and over.
it's sad watching all the defenders of this mythology have to squirm and come up with even more reasons to defend it.
I admire the faith, misplaced as it is.
And the Catholic church continues to show us that.
over and over and over.
it's sad watching all the defenders of this mythology have to squirm and come up with even more reasons to defend it.
I admire the faith, misplaced as it is.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 1:35 am to EthanL
quote:
--I'm sorry, but you will have to show me in the bible where we are directed to show reverence to Mary, a humble servant of God who was given the inestimable privilege of carrying the life of his son, Jesus Christ, until he was born. The references to her in the bible are few, but always her humility and meekness are highlighted. When did she become 'the mother of God'?
Much of this stems from Luke 1:28. LINK
Mary has even revealed herself and requested that they pray the rosary for peace: The Apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima "Recite the rosary every day to obtain the peace for the world and the end of the war."
Posted on 9/24/14 at 3:17 am to Bmath
This whole debate has been against Catholic vs. Semi-Catholic.
Never has anyone answered my real question.
The Catholic Mafia throughout history...and the evidence today. It's all about money. Always has been.
Never has anyone answered my real question.
The Catholic Mafia throughout history...and the evidence today. It's all about money. Always has been.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 6:04 am to RollTide1987
I wonder if this guy ever talks about the Qu'ran this way.
Posted on 9/24/14 at 6:44 am to EthanL
quote:
Is this institution so riddled with pedophiles that it just needs to be burned down?
Kinda like Islam should be destroyed because it's riddled with terrorist?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News