“Pope” francis just died, less than a day after VP Vance met with him and prayed “for [francis’] good health”.
(twitter.com)
GODFATHER III
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (134)
sorted by:
LMAO your source is gotquestions? Nice one. Unironically quoting an anti Catholic website regarding Catholicism is like quoting Mossad shill Alex Jones to prove Q isn't real. Next time try reading what Catholics actually believe instead of what people CLAIM they believe.
Pray to statues? Nope. That's bullshit. Been a Catholic my whole life never seen or heard of anyone praying to a statue.
If you're expecting a scripture reference for every last thing Christians do you'll be looking for a while. But that being said there are scriptures that are interpreted this way by Catholics. David calls upon the angels in Psalm 103:20-21 as a prayer. The intercessory prayers of the saints are described in Revelation 5:8.
Jesus is God. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Therefore she is the mother of God. This isn't rocket science. Elizabeth calls her "the mother of my Lord" in Luke 1:43. In fact, the hail Mary itself comes primarily from Luke 1:28. Among the titles given to her by Catholics that Protestants despise is "queen of heaven" but the scriptural basis for said title is literally found when she is given a crown of stars in Revelation 12:1.
Papal infallibility is one that is aggressively misunderstood. Infallibility only applies when a Pope is speaking Ex Cathedra which has happened exactly once.
Jesus HIMSELF says that the church has the authority to "bind and loose" in Matthew 16:19. Sins can be forgiven by the apostles. Would this not make them His vicars? Furthermore, even Protestants use the term "vicar" including Anglicans.
This is supposed to be a research board. Do better research.
You proved my point right here. If your religion’s practices are not based on scripture then it’s a tradition…. Period.
Praying to Mary is real in Catholic practices.
Huh? what kind of gobblygook is this? Point me to the scripture where humans (I.e popes) are infallible (aka never wrong).
So infallibility is real, it happened in Catholicism. Claiming any human (except Jesus) as infallible in ANY circumstance is an error and implies sinlessness. It is anti-Christ.
Maybe you should research your own religion. It is the harlot mentioned in Revelation. It claims the power to change the Sabbath and change the 10 Commandments which were written by the hand of God Himself.
"You proved my point right here. If your religion’s practices are not based on scripture then it’s a tradition"
Picking and choosing what scripture to follow. Paul literally says that we should follow tradition in 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Sola Scriptura is not Biblical at all.
"what kind of gobblygook is this?"
Thanks for admitting you have zero idea what you are talking about. One of the Biblical arguments for the concept of ex cathedra infallibility is John 16:13. All papal infallibility means is that when the bishop of Rome is making statements that apply to all Catholic churches he can not be in err (see Matthew 16:18).
"Maybe you should research your own religion."
LOL you are the one who needs to research it, not me.
"It is the harlot mentioned in Revelation"
Who told you that? Jack Chick? Trust me pal, this isn't the first time I've heard the "whore of Babylon is the Catholic church" argument. There are problems with that, for one it's an interpretation that even all protestants don't subscribe to. Furthermore, the Vatican is not one of the seven hills of Babylon as described in Revelation 17:10. The seven hills of Rome are Palatine, Capitoline, Aventine, Caelian, Esquiline, Viminal, and Quirinal. That alone shoots that idea that the Vatican is the Babylon of Revelation (not the Roman empire which was clearly the implication in the text as it was written during the persecution of Domitian) in the foot. Furthermore, Revelation 18:3 clearly states that "the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries". This implies that it is a global commerce hub (again PAGAN Rome sure as hell not the Vatican which has zero export afaik)
"It claims the power to change the Sabbath"
Are you a Seventh Day Adventist by chance? The Catholics did not "change" the Sabbath. The Sabbath was not changed, it was replaced by the Lord's Day (Revelation 1:10) in Christian worship.
"change the 10 Commandments which were written by the hand of God Himself"
The commandments aren't bulleted in the text. You can count as many as 13 or even 14 commandments and as a result, Jews, Catholics AND protestants all number them differently. The Catholic numbering was based on Augustine's writings after he studied Deuteronomy closely. Protestants were the ones who altered the ten commandments to split the first commandment into two and then combined the last two into one so they could "own" the Catholics over "muh statues" (forgetting that God Himself commanded statues of living things to be made namely the snake in Numbers 21:8). Even the fucking LUTHERANS use the Catholic ten commandments. It was protestant reformer John Calvin who altered the commandments in 1545 because he was an iconoclast. The Catholics did not change the commandments, if anything, protestants did.
AGAIN, please do some actual historical research outside of a Chick Tract.
Oh. Lord have mercy.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=gRdfX7ut8gw
And put aside the Commandments in the process?
Bless your heart.
I’d love your thoughts on what our Lord Jesus has to say about this subject: (w/o your condescending tone please)
Mark 7 5-13
5So the Pharisees and scribes questioned Jesus: “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders? Instead, they eat with defiled hands.”
6Jesus answered them, “Isaiah prophesied correctly about you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘These people honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me. 7They worship Me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’c 8You have disregarded the commandment of God to keep the tradition of men.d”
9He went on to say, “You neatly set aside the command of God to maintaine your own tradition. 10For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’f and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’g 11But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you would have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God), 12he is no longer permitted to do anything for his father or mother. 13Thus you nullify the word of God by the tradition you have handed down. And you do so in many such matters.”
Apologies for the lack of clarity fren, the sad/frustrated (not condescending) tone was aimed at redlotus’s comment above yours, in agreement with your comments, though he did have a point about “quoting an anti Catholic website regarding Catholicism is like quoting Mossad shill Alex Jones to prove Q isn't real.” not being a persuasive approach. Having done that many times, I can confirm it doesn’t work.
I strongly agree that it is good to pay attention to Jesus’s simple teachings first, before trying to understand Paul’s complex ones that require a lot of nuance and context.
“Tradition” was included because the Catholics vehemently hate all Jewish Talmudic thought and records (while it can be very off-target, not all of it is wrong, and some of it accidentally confirms the cross, kek. This is not an endorsement of it, mind you) yet hold to their traditions in the exact same stuff-necked and unhumbled manners, lacking self-examination based in scripture first…
…which was precisely what Jesus rebuked. Hence my sigh.
If I was gonna go condescending, it would be toward the “papal use of pompous words like ex-cathedra vicaral sacrosanctificatory transubstantificated concupiscatedly hermeneuticized”, thrown into a Latin mass (which probably was better than the current one, to be fair), because the more we can’t understand must means it’s that much more important, but … I don’t have a condescending attitude toward Catholicism itself, though I believe them wrong, and wouldn’t earnestly do that (the above condescension was very half-hearted and uninspired). In truth there things about the Catholic practices of faith I admire and would like to see preserved through any doctrinal corrections.
Mostly any actual attacks of mine toward them are toward the common lack of humility that many Catholics display in aggressive defense of their adhered man-made doctrines, or the occasional accidental blasphemy (which is more of a thing among gnostics than catholics), but even toward him, that comment was more intended to point out “redlotus probably doesn’t approve of Tevye’s adherence to tradition, yet advocates the same thing, while proclaiming Jesus, yet denying his words.”
Those parts makes me sad. Pride, people. Put away the pride! Like, I probably have a lot of error in belief myself, and I know I don’t follow what I do know perfectly, and also moreso if I get proud about what I have right, I’m not going to continue looking at my own plank so that I can see it to fix it.