>Pope Leo X: sold indulgences, killed cardinals. Leo X was Pope from 1513 to his death in 1521. He is known primarily for the sale of indulgences to reconstruct St. Peter's Basilica.
Pope Julius III looted the papal coffers to renovate his mansion in Rome. Julius III was known to have a thing for younger men. He liked to have sex with kids.
>Pope Paul III wasn't just a bad pope, he was a bad dude all around. He murdered relatives, including poisoning his mother and niece, to inherit the family fortune. Paul III was also notoriously corrupt, despite his supposed anti-corruption stance. Any position in the church was for sale and he famously took control of some 45,000 Roman prostitutes and then took a cut of their earnings.
Pope John XII was a notorious sex fiend. He had sex with women and men in the papal palace and when visitors refused his attentions he went ahead and raped them anyway. The same hospitality was extended to his two young sisters. He held massive orgies and took particular pleasure in defiling holy sites, like the tombs of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, with his sinful acts.
"John XII was worthy of being the rival of Elagabalus... a robber, a murderer, and incestuous person, unworthy to represent Christ upon the pontifical throne... This abominable priest soiled the chair of St. Peter for nine entire years and deserved to be called the most wicked of popes."
>"hurr durr God's true church protestantz go to hell if they don't follow us"
Then there was the Borgia Pope who changed the law so he could keep marrying and murdering countless wives.
Seriously, you'd expect us to keep following such a corrupt church and believe these men speak on behalf of God himself?
Who could blame anyone for wanting to separate themselves from such murderous thieves?
>Mass is so sacred tadition if you don't attend church you goes to hellz hurr
The “Mass” began when early Christians gathered together in their homes to share a meal in memory of Jesus, as he had asked them to do on the night before he died (“The Last Supper”). There was no obligation about this originally–Christians got together to pray, hear the Scriptures read, and share the meal because they wanted to. Over time the meal became more formalized and ritualized, and included readings from Scripture. As more time passed and Christians became more and more distant from the time of Jesus their enthusiasm waned and they no longer gathered for Mass so eagerly. So the church imposed a rule obligating Christians to attend Mass at least on Sunday.
>The word church in the Bible comes from the Greek word ecclesia, which means a called out company or assembly. Wherever it is used in the Bible it refers to people. It can be a mob (Acts 19:30-41), the children of Israel (Acts 7:38), and the body of Christ (Ephesians 1:22; Ephesians 5:25, 32).
Damn I didn't know this board was created.
On a side note, isn't the existence of witches and satanical pact still canon for Catholics today? Considering a bunch of papal bullae like Summis Desiderantes, since the Papal infallibility became a dogma as well during the First Vatican Council.
>No retard, everyone is a sinner and popes are no exception. Popes are different in that they can actually add things to Catholic teachings.
But you claim the Pope's word is as good as the word of God. You claim he is the chosen one to mediate between God and man. Why would God choose lustful murderous grave-robbing thieves?
This is who God chooses to be his ambassador?
>Why would God choose lustful murderous grave-robbing thieves?
This is for God to know. David wasn't particularly righteous either, was he?
Nobody is perfect. The point is that we are all like that inherently, these popes were just more direct and honest in their nature.
And anyway, it's been corrected, hasn't it? Indulgences are no longer sold.
Actually it's not unknown that the Vatican Bank STILL has a ripe history of embezzlement and scandal.
Show me a Catholic Creation Museum, and I'll show you an argument.
Catholics knew that people couldn't be trusted with interpreting the bible themselves, or you'd get people stoning one another for stealing sheep.
Luther was right about the corruption, but his idea to give everybody full rein literally ruined everything, and now we have American protestants and militant edgelords.
You can't even have a religion that keeps everybody culturally connected without some fat drunk ruining it all.
>Hurr people are too dum to read da bible
Identifying the reading and interpreting of the Bible as “Protestant” even affected the study of Scripture. Until the twentieth Century, it was only Protestants who actively embraced Scripture study. That changed after 1943 when Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu. This not only allowed Catholics to study Scripture, it encouraged them to do so. And with Catholics studying Scripture and teaching other Catholics about what they were studying, familiarity with Scripture grew.
How about the literal Dark Age?
The difference is that those whores, thieves and murderers turned their lives around after becoming Jesus' disciples.
The Popes through history used their positions of power to indulge and debase themselves. Everyone falls short, but many of the Popes through history clearly reveled in their sin.
Catholics the only thing you've really said so far is all people are fallible.
You've given no explanation as to why you think it was NOT a good idea for protestants to break away from a horribly corrupt church.
No explanation as to why God would choose murderers, thieves, graverobbers, homosexuals to lead his "one and only church"
You are the whore of Babylon sitting on the seven hills of Rome and I think some of you know it.
>Catholics the only thing you've really said so far is all people are fallible.
people are fallible indeed, and is fault of the protestants having separated from the church: the catholic and the orthodox churches are the only legitimate Christian assemble because the apostolic succession, the protestants completely broke away from this, they are not legitimate
A Greek Orthodox homosexual Byzantine Emperor and violent usurper was teaching a class on Manuel Komnenos, known heretic.
”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Manuel Komnenos and accept that he was the most majestic Roman Emperor the world has ever known, even greater than Constantine the Great!”
At this moment a chivalrous, Catholic Frankish Knight, who had vanquished 1500 Muslims on a Crusade and understood the necessity of war and fully supported all military decisions made by the Pope, stood up and held up a fresh Septuagint.
”Who compiled this Bible, pinhead?”
The treacherous Emperor smirked quite Jewishly and smugly replied “The Roman scribes, you stupid barbarian”
”Wrong. It’s been 1,000 years since the Roman Empire fell. If it is 1,400 years old and Greece is the home of the Romans… then why don't you possess the Eternal City of Rome itself?”
The Emperor was visibly shaken and dropped his gaudy icon and copy of Plutarch's Parallel Lives. He stormed out of the room crying those Greek crocodile tears. The same tears Greeks cry for the “disgraced Romans” (who today live in such luxury that most bath daily). There is no doubt that at this point our Emperor wished he had pulled himself up by his bootstraps and more strictly enforced the East-West Union as agreed upon at the Council of Florence. He wished so much that he had the Imperial Sword to kill himself from embarrassment, but he himself had pawned it off to the Venetians!
The students applauded and all joined the Holy Roman Empire that day and accepted Pope Eugene IV as Christ's Vicar on Earth. A double-headed eagle named “Church and State” flew into the room and perched atop the German Imperial Flag and shed a tear on the chalk. Dies Irae was sung several times, and God himself showed up and enacted a church tithe across the country to renovate St. Peter's Basilica.
The Emperor lost Constantinople and was killed beneath its walls the next day.
>people are fallible indeed, and is fault of the protestants having separated from the church: the catholic and the orthodox churches are the only legitimate Christian assemble because the apostolic succession, the protestants completely broke away from this, they are not legitimate
So when Popes are killing Cardinals, their mothers, sisters, cousins, brothers for money?
When their having sex with boys? Selling positions in the church? Re-writing law to have multiple marriages? Owning prostitues by the thousands?
We were just supposed to stand by all that?
All the above is not the fault of the Protestants, it's what caused protestants. YOU CATHOLICS caused the separation.
>All the above is not the fault of the Protestants, it's what caused protestants. YOU CATHOLICS caused the separation.
it would be the upper clergy fault, do not blame the poor catholic folk
>We were just supposed to stand by all that?
"And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."
you cut off the hand, the leg and the whole body: the idea of changing administration was good, but in the implementation you changed too many things
>break Christianity because "I'm the Pope"
>don't punish the Latins for sacking Constantinople
>let the Ottomans ruin the Balkans forever and conquer Hungary
>fail at keeping the Protestants under control, actually create more
The pentachy and the autocephalous patriarchs are the rightful successors to the Apostles. If the Pope would stop licking his own balls and think for five seconds, he'd realise this and re-join the Chalcedonian church as Patriarch of the West.
I may look into this. I'm tired of my fellow Protestants being "facebook Christians" as I call them. Sitting in church like gud bois then gossping like old hens the second they're out.
I'd like to join the Catholics because of the tradition and all but man, there's just so much hokus pokus it's hard to separate what is from man and what is actually from God.
They're also rampant alcoholics who think they can touch some water on Sunday and it's all good.
Yes I realize Jesus left his church with Peter.
Nobody here is debating that.
What I'm debating is how Catholics say Protestants are going to hell for not following Catholicism, but when the leaders of Catholicism are so horribly corrupt and murderously sinful, how were we supposed to stay and follow that?
How can you blame us for wanting to get away from that?
from a catholic pov i can say that:
1. The lack of apostolic succession
i am not a theologian, but i can say with certainty that the authority of the catholic and orthodox churches derives from the succession of the upper clergy from the apostoles of Christ
protestants deny the fundamental sacrament of the Eucharist which Christ established during the last supper.
The Eucharist is the fundament of the church as assembly of people which remembers the sacrifice of Christ
3.the protestants are too much divided in smaller sects (this one is more a pet peeve of mine and my priest)
Still, I believe that if you are a pious man, and believe in Christ as Saviour of humanity, you could be saved, even if you are not from the """"right"""" church
says who? you? are pathetic arrogant heretic.
Jesus Christ handed off the reigns to Peter.
To think that in the 40 days where Christ walked the Earth he wouldn't tell the apostles what to do with the church is just foolish.
Obviously the scripture is important but dumping tradition because it isn't hURR IN DA BIBLLE is like cutting off your arm.
Tradition and scripture coexist and complement one another
I seriously doubt you have any inclinations towards Catholicism with your profound arrogance.
No surprise Protestants are fake facebook Christians like you say because the Protestant faith demands nothing from you. Casual Christianity. Feel sorry for your sins and think God has forgiven you. What a joke.
The Church was established by Christ for the people and the sacraments are absolutely necessary.
Don't even get me started on the joke you protestants call mass.
Drink this grape juice and eat this little cookie as a symbolic gesture. Na fuck off faggots
'nother proddy here, I agree with >>36392 especially the last part, although in my church, we value the symbolism of the Eucharist but with how diverse Protestantism is that may be under scrutiny depending on the organization.
>we r the truth!
Surely you can do the works scripture says you will be able to do, like laying on hands and curing people of their diseases.
It's not a matter of faith, but a matter of being authorised by God.
Of yes because Protestants have never done anything evil before.
These popes might be horrible people but at least they didn't pronounce heretical beliefs that led the eternal damnation of souls.
Which is worse?
To live a sinful life.
Or to prentend to be a just person and lead others away from Christ into hell because of your own foolish pride.
You are above the Church established by Christ and the apostles? What arrogance. You assume you know better than the early church fathers.
I fucking hate protestant scum. Arrogant shitheads.
Go back to your megachurches and dance around the altar like perfidious jews.
Not him but you're not that much of a shining example either. Tradition is important true but with how I grew up in a Proddie household in a Catholic country notorious for its being extremely religious and Catholic private school. It seems to me sometimes it's all tradition and ceremony that's being emphasized and not as much the relationship with Christ as in my church. But that's just my observation.
The thing is, Peter was only ever bishop of Antioch, he never actually served as bishop of Rome. The bishop of Jerusalem at the time, Jesus apparent brother, James the Just, was also held to be higher than Peter.
What Jesus said to Peter (You will be the rock upon which I will build my church) is correct, but the term that he used (Petrus, which became a name only after Peter took it), referred to a rock that is a part of a larger cliff-face.
Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give.
Look at all of 'em doing it.
If ya people were serious about your faith you would instantly abandon your church and search for the one that does this.
Question to Catholics;
If it was Jesus' intention to institute a global corporate church, when then does he address messengers from churches, plural? Instead of addressing individual churches, why didn't Christ simply address his one and only representative who held authority over "THE" church?
Lack of apostolic succession
Sure Jesus left his church with Peter. 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)
There is nowhere in the Bible where Jesus said, Here Peter, here is my church. But only you can pass this on, anyone else is not legitimate.
I see That Peter was given the lead by Jesus himself, What I don't see is some rule that says only those directly descended from his lead can teach.
In my Protestant church we have Communion once a month.
Maybe others don't?
I don't see how tradition can take anything away from your personal relationship with Christ.
If anything that is an individual issue.
Tradition exists to help you. It was good enough for the saints it should be good enough for you. If you aren't building your relationship with Christ that is your issue.
I don't see how going to a Protestant church is going to increase your relationship with Christ if you didn't have much of one already.
typical Protestant hair splitting
Jesus handed off the reigns to Peter
Peter built up the Church as ordered by God
You can interpret this any way you want but you are avoiding common sense to your own detriment
Protestants can't handle the truth
The truth is that you are wrong and if you persist in your heresy you will burn in hell
There is NO salvation outside of the One True Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church
protestants might be nice people and all…and believe in Jesus but your churches/teahcings/masses are heretical and put you outside the pale.
Repent or die
I used to be pretty hardcore about this true church stuff, but it doesn't matter as the original Jesus community died out a long time ago.
If it was preserved completely, we'd all be a bunch of Jews still.
a psychologist cannot drive out a demon, nor can a psychiatrist.
In several years of treatment that I have been following, I still have my demon inside, still looking for the true church tho.
Also no catholic has even wanted to try drive it off me.
The thing is, I see people caring more about doing their rosaries, confessions and memorizing all the hymns than opening the Bible, giving it a read and trying to dissect it. The strength of Protestantism is that it emphasizes the Bible and the understanding it, as well as building up that relationship with Christ. I like the minimalism of our masses desu. Songs of worship, tithes with some songs, discussing and interpretting the word, more songs of worship then we leave. No pomp and no frivolities. Then again I am a simple guy who likes to get to the point and go around the fluff. So it might just be me.
Sick of you Protestants giving bogus history about indulgences.
Indulgences were for sins ALREADY FORGIVEN, and selling them for money was never a policy of the Church. Corruption did occur, which was why the Council of Treant was put in for reforms to mitigate this practice.
I'm not a Protestant.
>Jesus handed the reigns to Peter
As one of many, as I just said.
>Catholic Church is the True Church
Yeah, doesn't God love indulgences and paedophilia?
The church is a commune, not a monarchy. The Pope has no claim to universal jurisdiction, he's simply one priest among many that took his heresy too far.
Technically they can, because what you call a "demon" is mental illness. Exorcism is a placebo, it reduces anxiety because you believe it has power.
>It seems to me sometimes it's all tradition and ceremony that's being emphasized and not as much the relationship with Christ as in my church. But that's just my observation.
This so much
I've even heard of Catholic Priests being chastised for spending too much time reading the bible and not enough on hocus pokus
"The scandalous conduct of the "pardoners" was an immediate occasion of the Protestant Reformation. In 1517, Pope Leo X offered indulgences for those who gave alms to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. The aggressive marketing practices of Johann Tetzel in promoting this cause provoked Martin Luther to write his Ninety-Five Theses, condemning what he saw as the purchase and sale of salvation."
When you are praying the rosary you are meditating on the Bible. You would know this but you are a heretic so its understandable that you have no idea what Catholics are doing.
Maybe its because I'm not a faggot heretic like you but I prefer Latin gregorian chanting to the youth band jaming on the altar like a bunch of hippies.
And I prefer taking part in the holy and unbloody sacrifice on calvary than a stupid dinner metaphor made up by a rabid anti-Semitic shit eating German monk who turned on his vows and fucked a nun.
God should be given the best of what humans have to offer. I don't think God would appreciate you cutting corners with your churches that look like tool sheds.
Catholicism has never been anti-Semitic you fucking idiot.
The Catholic church has always been against racist teachings.
Jews who converted and were baptized were brought into the fold immediately. To be racist would be to deny the validity of the sacraments which is impossible.
Traditionally speaking the Catholic Church has always taught that Jews should be marginalized in society but NEVER harmed physically in any way. The pogroms were typically started by rebel priests or monks who would use Old Testament teachings to inspire bloodshed. When this happened the first place Jews would run to is the local bishop who would protect them.
Sure the Church opposes Jewish teachings because they are false and subversive that doesn't mean the church is racist. Which it is not.
Jesus was indeed a Jew but he transcends race.
Only race baiting Marxist scum want you to believe the Church is anti-Semitic
>typical Protestant hair splitting
>understanding masculine/feminine adjectives in a language
Peter, Petros is the individual stone built into something bigger, specifically the body of Christ. Christ himself is the corner stone, the foundation, the bedrock.
This is what Jesus was establishing. We are all Petros, we are all smaller individual stones built into something bigger and we are all built on top of the corner stone, Jesus Christ.
Your main argument seems to be the Apostolic Succession... Please explain where that came from.
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 twelfth apostle in Acts chapter 1 as an example of apostolic succession. While Matthias did indeed “succeed” 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.
>should be marginalized in society
And that's wrong.
Judaism is part of Catholic heritage, Christian heritage in general. It does no good being antagonistic, just respect each other's shit.
Here I am keeping my tongue and trying to be civil and here you are being an ass.
I get some of your points but as far as I see it. God would prefer we use the money that would have been used for building a fancy church.
Meditating on the word I know what it's intended FOR but okay. Sure, you did your thing and now what? Does it deepen your understanding of what God must have wanted you to understand? Does it give any new insights that you might have not realized in the past?
You got me on the Gregorian chants.
I don't know what you do in your country, but as far as communion goes in mine, the only difference when a pastor does it and when a Catholic priest does it is that the priest's wafer is larger. Hell, even the words are near the same.
Nice Ad-hominem attacks protescunts.
It's not like protestant leaders were fallible as well or anything.
>Luther wasn't an unstable and repressed monk who was desperately wanted a way out.
>Calvin wasn't fucking insane
>Henry VIII wasn't a wife-murderer
>Joseph Smith wasn't fucking insane.
Protescunt trying to smear Catholics detected.
I get some of your points but as far as I see it. God would prefer we use the money that would have been used for building a fancy church to be used on a charity, or on a missionary's funds to go teach the world Christianity.
Helps to that a cheaper church has cheaper maintenance costs if it gets wrecked in a tropical storm.
Didnt get added earlier
>The thing is, I see people caring more about doing their rosaries, confessions and memorizing all the hymns than opening the Bible, giving it a read and trying to dissect it.
Most people throughout history were not literate. And those that weren't on the other hand could confess and pray. Also Scripture as we know it didn't exist for a long time.
On the other hand Catholicism does encourage reading philosophy and religious literature as it is necessary for a good understanding of the Bible
>The strength of Protestantism is that it emphasizes the Bible and the understanding it, as well as building up that relationship with Christ.
That's what the Catholic church does as well, most pious people read a lot of Scripture.
>I like the minimalism of our masses desu.
I loathe the protestant influence on Catholic mass, it went from something truly beautiful to a lesser version of itself full of trash pop songs.
>Songs of worship, tithes with some songs, discussing and interpretting the word, more songs of worship then we leave.
That's how you end up with the Logos becoming something interpreted by people without any authority on interpretation and have 30k churches.
>No pomp and no frivolities. Then again I am a simple guy who likes to get to the point and go around the fluff. So it might just be me.
Catholic mass right now is very simple. You sing, read scripture, pray and take the Eucharist, the most essential part you kicked out.
But do you believe in transubstantiation?
Are you doing this symbolically or do you believe you are actually receiving Christ?
Yes Judaism is a part of Catholic heritage but it is in the past. Jesus doesn't want you to be a fucking jew anymore.
Jews should be marginalized for multiple reasons.
1. Jews deny Christ and the prophets (given an easy layup with salvation and too stupid/arrogant/stubborn to see the truth
2. Jews actively work to subvert Christian morality in any society they live in
3. Jews actively use usury to crush goyim and turn them into their slaves
Jews are a cancer. In denying Christ they have become revolutionary and look to undermine everything Christian in a spirit of revenge. Of course there are good Jews but if you look at revolutionary/subversive movements throughout history you will find the Jews.
One sin does not justify another. If someone kills your wife, you do not have the right to kill the murderer. You have the authority to see justice be sought and rebuke the man for his crimes and help him repent, but you cannot stoop to sin to remedy another sin. In the same way Luther did not have the right to schismatically divide the Church because of the corruption he saw and perceived. Yes, he could loudly argue, protest, and reform from within and even seek some measure of retribution, but to separate completely was not justifiable.
If Luther had just tried to bring to attention the scandals and abuses he would be a great Catholic. But in his own pride he put himself and his manmade ideas above the church thereby becoming a heretic.
If anyone ever tried to tell you that scripture was the basis of everything before the invention of the printing press you would have been laughed out of town.
Protestants have a complete lack of common sense and historical understanding.
Jesus could have said "kepha" in Aramaic. Jesus could have also used gesticulations and vocal emphasis to get his point across. We cannot know one way or the other.
What we do know, is that regardless of what languages were spoken by Jesus or the apostles, Koine Greek was the original language of "New Testament" scriptures.
If we believe that all scripture is "God-breathed", then God had NT scriptures originally transmitted in Koine Greek for a reason, and linguistic attributes of that language should not be ignored or passed over.
There's different words for "rock" in Greek though and whoever was translating it from Aramaic went with "petrus."
The word "kepha" has no gender, because Aramaic is different from Greek. When Matthew wrote his gospel, he should have used "petra" (Again, meaning a small stone that is a part of a larger rock. See the city of Petra for an example of the word in practice), but that would have been improper because it was feminine, so Matthew invented a new word, what we know as "Petrus."
Schizophrenia can be very hard to treat.
We believe we're actually taking in Christ, pastor took good notice to emphasize it today too
Today's times are different as most of us can read now, unlike then.
It doesn't have the same tradition of it as Protestantism, for a good long while Catholic mass was done in Latin and the priest's back to the convent. Even my theology teacher who was Catholic admitted Protestants are better at interpreting the Bible than them.
I found the moments when you had to echo the words of the priest with a pre-planned phrase to be quite tedious.
And that's why we invest alot on sending the ones who have been told by God to go into preaching to schools like IGSL for years in order for them to get legitimate Bible interpreting and understanding , as well as teaching them Aramaic, Ancient Greek and Hebrew so they can better understand the words meant by Jesus, the prophets, apostles, etc.
We didn't kick out the communion in mine
>I think I am smarter than St. Matthew
The audacity of you people is truly astounding
If consider yourself possessed by a demon that causes you harm, you must have some form of it. You should be sent to a mental hospital before your "demon" kills anyone.
I'm not though, I already said this.
The explanation I gave is the only possible origin for the term "Petrus." It didn't exist as a name or as a word before the NT.
>the Apostles are infallible
>He wished so much that he had the Imperial Sword to kill himself from embarrassment, but he himself had pawned it off to the Venetians!
nowhere in Scripture did Jesus, the apostles, or any other New Testament writer set forth the idea of “apostolic succession.”
Can you explain this ^^^
There was never some line of descendants put in place. Hell, the first leaders weren't even called Popes.There was no Pope in the first churches.
Helps to drive a point to the people you're teaching when you're facing them.
Plus wouldn't God like it more if you spent more time helping people along their spiritual journey than doing everything perfectly for him? Sure doing it perfectly is worship in itself but nothing can always be so perfect. But that's just how I see it.
I'm tired. It's 2:34am. Good night people.
The distinction does exist, because Koine Greek is the language the NT was written in, so it must have. Using "petra" would have been an insult to Peter, so "petros" was used instead.
>why can't I have a demon
Because you're crazy and demons don't exist.
>I have the same evidence you do
There's a wealth of evidence that mental illness exists, and signs that you are suffering from it, but no evidence that demons or possession are real.
>since you cannot find a single fault in my brain
Ask that question in a mental hospital after they examine and diagnose you.
>We believe we're actually taking in Christ, pastor took good notice to emphasize it today too
So you believe in transubstantiation? That's not very protestant.
>Today's times are different as most of us can read now, unlike then.
But you claimed that those who don't read it are essentially less Christian as praying rosary and confession isn't as worthy.
>It doesn't have the same tradition of it as Protestantism, for a good long while Catholic mass was done in Latin and the priest's back to the convent. Even my theology teacher who was Catholic admitted Protestants are better at interpreting the Bible than them.
You don't even have a unified interpretation, you have thousands of them. How is that better interpretation?
>I found the moments when you had to echo the words of the priest with a pre-planned phrase to be quite tedious.
You aren't there to have fun.
>And that's why we invest alot on sending the ones who have been told by God to go into preaching to schools like IGSL for years in order for them to get legitimate Bible interpreting and understanding , as well as teaching them Aramaic, Ancient Greek and Hebrew so they can better understand the words meant by Jesus, the prophets, apostles, etc.
You can find those in many places. People usually don't specialize in exegesis as much.
Also where do you base your legitimacy? You diverge on interpretation to a point of cacophony.
>We didn't kick out the communion in mine
Which one is that?
This is mass. It is about the holy sacrifice on calvary. This isn't religious education class fool.
You face forward because important shit is taking place on the altar not in the pews.
If you want to talk about the teaching time…the priests faces you for 30min-1hr when giving the homily.
Is everyone such a special snowflake now where they have to be the center of attention all the time?
The Catholic/Orthodox church produced the New Testament. Authority stems from God to the church.
Tradition is just a term for church knowledge, part of which was expressed in the Bible, which was never intended to be the only knowledge since it doesn't say that in the Bible
TLDR: the Holy Spirit did it, chill
Ad hominem makes you look like a child.
>note the arrogance
That you invented right here? Sure.
If you think he's possessed, you're as crazy as him.
Yes, I'll just post a century of evidence for you. Your position is ridiculous, please get to a mental hospital before you hurt someone.
It did exist at the time. Jesus specifically used "petra/petros" when referring to Peter so as to make him realise he is one among many Apostles, that the church is composed of all of them together.
He also wanted to distance Christians from Jewish usury.
Isn't lending okay so long as you don't ask for interest though?
>The Catholic/Orthodox church produced the New Testament.
>this is what Catholics/Orthodox actually believe
NT canon was well established long before any council took place. Church councils simply made it official.
Banks were originally charity organizations for the poor…usury free loans to help poor farmers.
Then everyone started getting lazy allowing 1-3% rate of interest…and then capitalism came to dominate our lives
In the medieval world there was also fair pricing laws/customs. Today its all about profit but in the medieval world if it cost you 10cents to make something you could charge 11-15cents not a fucking dollar.
Capitalism is all about out jewing each other for shekels.
And I am not advocating for socialism or communism. Christian pricing regulations and anti-usury laws should be put in place to protect ourselves from the evils of the free market.
There is nothing wrong though with owning property
Indeed, but the problem was there were many gospels and other books that didn't get into the final product.
Tradition carried the scripture, but there was a lot sects much akin to protestantism who made problems.
Good luck ending up another statistic then, after you suicide by cop, or your own hand, when your "demon" becomes too much for you.
If the distinction was made in Koine Greek in the NT, then surely it existed at the time?
To be honest, I don't see why banking can't work in a semi-socialist state. You want your people to succeed, so when they ask for a loan for a house or a business, give them one interest free. They'll pay it back then after they've established themselves.
The people get something, the government gets its money back. Everybody wins.
This is why I believe the super duper original flavor of Jesus-teaching died out and it's no use trying to recover it. Whoever decided what the right tradition was, they changed it to suit their purposes, and all others flowed from that source.
You should read the Gospel of Judas. Instead of being an evil bastard who is refereed to by Jesus as "the one who would have been better off not being born" - he is told by Jesus to betray him, because his death and sacrifice is necessary. Jesus goes on to say that Judas' name will be vilified, but that he will gain true heaven after death, because he is the only Apostle who actually understood his teachings.
Essentially, Judas becomes Christ-like because, like Christ, he sacrificed himself for the greater good of all humankind.
It was decided through discourse mostly by people now known as the Church fathers who agreed on most things, aside very fine theology like original sin and purgatory.
Their writing are just a bit younger than Gospel of John for example, Tatious wrote in early second century. There was no break in teaching or tradition.
Oh right, sorry, I was thinking of something completely different. Yes, "petrus" was chosen because of the gender difference. Both "petra" and "petrus" however refer to a rock that is a part of a larger stone.
>IT DOESN'T EXIST BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE IT
You clearly are deranged. Google schizophrenia, rightfully diagnose yourself, and then get help.
That pic would be less ridiculous if protestants were divided in 100k different denominations all stating exactly opposite things, every pastor being effectively a church and tradition of its own and in no way closer to Jesus than the catholic church itself.
Gospel of Judas as not a retelling of events as John, Mark, Luke or Matthew, it was more akin to Greco Roman tradition of writing myth, Aeneid is an example of a similar attempt.
Also I've read it.
Well, Jesus did what was right when he drove them from the temple and whipped them like cattle.
Should we do the same to our bankers and lenders?
Well, it has been dated to the late 100s/early 200s, so you may be correct, but given the confusion that still exists around Judas, his actions, and his fate, it may be real. I don't know if it is, I just like it.
>when do protestants think the Catholic church stopped being the one founded by Christ himself
Can't stop something that never started.
The church established by Christ is made up of those who follow him... simple as that. It is not defined by any denomination or corporate body, it is defined by the fruits of its members.
> For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
This is the essence of "the one true church". If you are following Christ, you are part of the body, and for the time being you can be part of the body while being Catholic, Orthodox or protestant.
However, a time will come when God calls his people out of Babylon, at which point we're all going to have to drop any affiliations and loyalties to denominations or corporate entities and follow the voice of God. People who are too caught up in fighting between Catholic, Orthodox, protestant etc. are going to miss the call and get left in Babylon and receive her plagues.
In the canon gospels he wasn't even a believer at first but for some reason he became one after the resurrection.
Speaking of them as literature Peter is more important, so speaking of them as religion I believe Peter was more important
The rest is assertions which will be countered by more assertions, nobody knows the truth.
Non-canon gospels is where it gets hairy since one of them, Thomas I think, says Jesus told Peter to follow James as the new boss
But Protestants owe the canon to Catholics/Orthodox since they didn't exist yet, so if this is not canon this is not true, some heretical group made it up.
And then you have the people who claim the canon gospels are unreliable and the original Jesus group was a family thing, more of a prayer group than a new religion, Jesus didn't claim to be the Messiah and all that.
Who knows, really.
200ish years is about the amount of time needed for myth and legend to develop. This is what people fail to understand in relation to the gospels of Matt, Mark, Luke and John, they can be dated close enough to the death of Christ that it would be FAR too early for the events in them to be considered mythological.
It's no coincidence that all the Gnostic gospels start to appear about 200 years after the crucifixion.
>In the canon gospels he wasn't even a believer at first but for some reason he became one after the resurrection.
>for some reason
I guess having the risen Christ literally appear to you might just have that effect. Plus if we're going to start attacking the disciples character or question their faith, what about the fact Peter denied his saviour THREE times? And what was it Christ said to Peter that one time...?
>But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
No, accusing the brethren is not the way to go on this.
> so speaking of them as religion I believe Peter was more important
Scripture is scripture is scripture. 2 Timothy 3:16
>These popes might be horrible people but at least they didn't pronounce heretical beliefs that led the eternal damnation of souls.
>you will worship jesus's dead body. your goal is not to worship him, but his body when it was dead, devoid of his spirit.
>you will also worship the whore of babylon. semiramis, ishtar, isis, astarte, venus, astaroth, gaia, mother earth, too many names. let's rename her to black madonna/virgin mary so it's easier for goyim.
>you will now do your worship on sun worship day.
>you will observe nimrod's birthday, on december 25. it's ok, it's really jesus's. oh, your kids will also worship satan claus and materialistic presents more than jesus.
>you will also observe ishtar's holiday. let's call it easter, and attach pagan rituals involving rabbits and eggs to it.
>don't forget the death worship, preceded by worship of evil spirits and glorification of monsters.
>i don't like these scriptures about enoch. let's remove them from the word of god and transform them into non-canon extra biblical texts. nothing will happen guys!
>fill up every church with icons, graven images and other stuff. enclose every jesus icon in a vagina shaped oval, to represent him being under semiramis's control in this place.
>and finally, place me, the emperor as a replacement for jesus himself. i will be like the most high. an antichrist, a replacement for christ.
>make sure to name it something that adds up to 666 like "vicar of christ".
catholicism in a nutshell.
No one has time to read your green text ramblings heretic
When you go to Bible Thumper School is the first thing they do hit you with sticks and get you to repeat anti-Catholic babylon memes?
Someone really needs to make a book of Protestant memes they are adorable
Its fun to think about fat rednecks sitting in church basement drinking diet coke and using the bible and recent current events to predict the end of the world
and yet you believe everything a roman emperor said.
romans, the same pagans who were murdering christians while pursuing domination, and then took over christianity when their empire started collapsing, transformed it into a tool of conquest and became the holy roman empire to keep ruling the known world.
they didn't just collapse and disappear.
christianity is still about jesus, not about queens, goddesses or a mother figure worship. that stuff is pagan.
the triad is father, son and holy ghost. no mother there.
disrespecting the Most Holy Virgin and Mother of God
What do you think Jesus would say to you if he heard you disrespecting his momma?
i know the difference between mary, mother of jesus and "virgin mary, queen of heaven, mother of god and secret co-creator of the universe" catholics worship.
at the same time you will hear this:
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
>applying logic to a situation where a child was born of a virgin
>applying logic to a totally illogical situation
jesus received a body from mary, and it was pure. but not because she was sinless (because no human can be sinless. every human was born with adam's sin, no exceptions), but because it wasn't tainted with the seed of sons of god in the past generations.
god needed a pure human body without any of satan's tainted hybrid seed in it.
but jesus is so much more than 3 dimensional flesh and blood man. the flesh died, then was transformed into divine when he resurrected.
>putting God in a box.
Jesus was both fully God AND fully man. He is the only begotten Son of God and yet he is also the second Adam, Son of man. When God was manifest in the flesh he experienced his own creation just as we would experience it.
So no, God did not need Mary to be magically sinless for her to conceive.
>the Protestant faith demands nothing from you. Casual Christianity. Feel sorry for your sins and think God has forgiven you. What a joke.
jesus forgave the criminal who was on his side during crucification and promised him heaven, didn't he?
there was no rituals involved in there.
it should be yours and god's mutual relationship, not a third dude who listens in on your sins to forward them to authorities if needed, then takes your money to "shorten your dead relatives' stay in mini-hell" in an act of pure materialism.
that said, i'm not a "faith alone" guy. i do think a person should consciously try to change himself for the better while believing, not just wait for jesus to do it himself sometime in the future.
even if you're saved at that moment, your life is usually long and temptations will return. too many protestants and cultural catholics think that since they're in the church or were saved before, they're now free to do whatever they want, mecome ultra materialistic, commit grave sins and not lose their salvation.
they're there for the people, not for salvation. otherwise the people he saved who never did these rituals wouldn't be saved.
he came to establish the temple of god where holy spirit dwells within each person, not in a building with its rituals and priests.
Yea the Catholic church that preserved the Christian texts for thousands of years is the "whore of Babylon," the enemy of Christendom.
That makes perfect sense.
>What I'm debating is how Catholics say Protestants are going to hell for not following Catholicism
I'm Catholic, and I don't know anyone aside from a few online edgelords who think that all or even a majority of protestants are going to hell.