SPLIT: 14 Things I Believe the Catholic Church Errs On.

By the Grace of God, maybe someday you won’t limit yourself to the written Word of God but to the **entire **Word of God - written **and **spoken.

How did the early Christians do this before the Bible was canonized in the year 382AD?

We agree. In a sense you can say the Catholic Church added to the Bible. The Church added the entire New Testament. Adding to the Word is very problematic (i.e. adding the word “alone” in Romans 3:28) Could you imagine if a Pope ever did this? We Catholics would never hear the end of it.

lampo,
At least you admit the erroneous error of the RCC, adding to the word of God. Why do you accept doctrines of men?
You obvoiusly didn’t read the warning in Rev.2218, “I warn everyone who hears the word of prophecy of this book; and If anyone adds anything to them, God will add the plagues described in this book”

you may want to ponder on the following.

The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book,

  1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
  2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
  3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
  4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
  5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
  6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
  7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
  8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”? (Matt. 23:9).
  9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
  10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
  11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
  12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
  13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
  14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

Is tjhe word ‘Catholic’ written in the Bible? NO!

jean8

Jean,
I really will pray for you. You ignore so much and twist to the point of only understanding what you want to hear.

EVERY one of the points that you list above have been overwhelmingly discussed, and proven from a Catholic point of view, biblically, yet you pick and choose what you want to hear.

I really admire your passion for what you believe, but I pray for you because you probably don’t realize that this same passion is leading others from the truth.

It would be nice to discuss each of the points again, but you tend to skip over and ignore it when you are presented with the truth.

It is obvious that you are not Catholic and that you lied. Not only that, you haven’t paid attention to anything anyone has posted to you in the past several days. You have come in here to basically harrass us. This is not the place for you. You are being reported.

Is the word “reformed or protestant” written in the bible?
Does the bible say that a person is assured salvation before death?
Why do protestants rewrite the bible using the word “alone” after the words, faith, bible and the other three of the five solas?
Where is the word “tent revival” in the bible?
Where is it written in the bible that the Catholic faith is not the “true faith of Christ” ?
Where is it written in the bible that the true gospel would come to reformers 1500 years after the time of Christ?

You obviously haven’t a clue what you are talking about.
When John wrote Revelations there was no Bible in existence. When he says not to add or take away anything from “this book” he is talking about the Book of Revelations which he has written.

Where did I admit such a thing? Why would I admit such a thing? You took my statement, “In a sense you can say the Catholic Church added to the Bible.” out of context. My very next sentence was, “The Church added the entire New Testament.” The NT is what I was referring to when I said the Catholic Church added to the Bible.

Hi Peary

First of all it’s very apparent he is not Catholic.
Secondly, it’s really funny how when a Non-Catholic gives their opinion we are automatically called a lier or are only here to harass you all. This is a forum where Catholic and Non-Catholic beliefs are discussed. If you don’t want Non-Catholics in here then ban us. When you say that we don’t pay any attention to what has been previously posted it’s because we feel it is incorrect, not because we just want to pick on Catholics(Well most of us). Like I said if you don’t want us here, BAN US. You and I are no different in the fact that we are just standing up for what we believe. If you can’t handle that then get rid of us or stop comming here yourself.

The OP cut n pasted their list directly from this anti-catholic website. bible.ca/catholic-doctrine.htm

This is the heading of the website:



Massive list of Roman Catholic False doctrines
-http://www.bible.ca/i-devil.gif
**

**

Given that why should we believe he is here for a serious discussion?

(Edited)
Obviously the opinions expressed by the poster in question are biased and not self taught. They certainly don’t come from any self study, but the recycling of what has been heard and assumed to be true. They are the continuation of a bias against the Catholic faith. (Edited)

Thanks be to God (& peary).

So you reject the entire New Testament?

Why do you accept doctrines of men?

When the Man who gave the doctrines is Christ Jesus, why wouldn’t I?

You obvoiusly didn’t read the warning in Rev.2218, “I warn everyone who hears the word of prophecy of this book; and If anyone adds anything to them, God will add the plagues described in this book”

A similar warning is found in the Old Testament. It is meant as a warning to the scribes responsible for making the copies of each manuscript, that they do their job well.

you may want to ponder on the following.

The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book,

  1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).
  2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).
  3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).
  4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).
  5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).
  6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).
  7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).
  8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”? (Matt. 23:9).
  9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).
  10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).
  11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).
  12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).
  13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).
  14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?

It is considered good forum manners to give a link when you copy/paste from another website, in fact I believe it’s one of the rules here. I could give you a Biblical answer for every one of these - would you accept it?

Is the word ‘Catholic’ written in the Bible? NO!

Actually, yes it is. In Acts 9:31. Ekklesia kataholos.

Congratulations -
You’ve got your own thread now and off the topic thread. And I don’t have to respond to the nonCatholic nonsense. Others are free to do so, however they wish. Good luck. Remember what Alice in Wonderland said: “Any road will take you there if you don’t know where you’re going.” We have the Church. Our map is very clear. We don’t have 30,000 protestant ideas to contend with.

I see no such admission there.Definitely not in the sense that you seem to want to take it.

However, Let’s pose that question to you.

“Why do you accept doctrines of men?” The essential doctrine of Sola Scriptura is a gross fundamental error in teaching and itself is not found taught within the Word of God. It is only about 50 years old and would indeed qualify as a modern new wind of doctrine of men.

Furthermore, it has lead to a myriad of equally errant teachings and doctrines, (Sola Fide for example) which plague n-C Christianity today.

You obvoiusly didn’t read the warning in Rev.2218, “I warn everyone who hears the word of prophecy of this book; and If anyone adds anything to them, God will add the plagues described in this book”

Perhaps you didn’t read it in context yourself, but that passage applies to the prophecies of the book of Revelation, not the whole Bible.

Even so, the Catholic Church has never added to the Bible, but many -Cs have removed the Deuterocanonical books from the Bible without any greater authority that the will of some man, or at best, a “Bible Society” in the mid 1800s.

A careful check of all the earliest discussions of the Canon of inspired writings will readily show that they affirmed a 73 book canon.

you may want to ponder on the following.

The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book,

  1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6).

You may want to do your own homework and not rely on virulently anti-Catholic websites like that one.

It doesn’t. That verse condemns hypocrisy not clothes. :rolleyes:

  1. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28).

Find me any authentic and authoritative Catholic document that teaches such a thing.

You can’t do so because there is no such thing.

  1. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9).

Funny, the homily last Sunday was on that very thing. But there is a difference in the New Testament between the ministerial priesthood and the priesthood of all believers. The New Testament makes that very clear, else why did they lay hands on men and ordain them in the churches that they founded?

  1. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11).

Does it? No, it does not. in fact it actually condemns your remark here when it says, [FONT=Palatino Linotype]" Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a festival day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths, 17 Which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ." (Colossians 2)

  1. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2).

The Catholic Church teaches that same thing, but only a blind person would ever try to assert that some are not more exemplary than others and that is acknowledged by the Catholic Church’s canonization.
(Cont’d)
[/FONT]

  1. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5).

Does it? I think not. Iconoclasm: Or: Catholics Worship Graven Images NOT

  1. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12).

It actually does not. Look at the list of scripture that your position seeks to discount and/or ignore. Pouring and Sprinkling versus Immersion
[FONT=Verdana][size=3]Furthermore. why do you not consider it essential to salvation as the Word of God does. [/size][/FONT]Who REALLY Preaches “A Different Gospel”?

  1. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as “father”? (Matt. 23:9).

Does it? Or is this just another modern teaching of man? Call No Man Father?

  1. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11).

Funny, there is far more to that than you are willing to accept.

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church.

and again…

552 Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had confessed: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Our Lord then declared to him: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.” Christ, the “living Stone”, thus assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death. Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it.

881 The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the “rock” of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock. “The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head.” This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church’s very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.

(Cont’d)

  1. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5).

Again… a misrepresentation of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the “one mediator between God and men”. But because in his incarnate divine person he has in some way united himself to every man, “the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery” is offered to all men. He calls his disciples to “take up [their] cross and follow [him]”, for “Christ also suffered for [us], leaving [us] an example so that [we] should follow in his steps.” In fact Jesus desires to associate with his redeeming sacrifice those who were to be its first beneficiaries. This is achieved supremely in the case of his mother, who was associated more intimately than any other person in the mystery of his redemptive suffering. Apart from the cross there is no other ladder by which we may get to heaven.

  1. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5).

It doesn’t. That seeks to ignore something taught by Christ Himself and preached by St. Paul. Priestly celibacy is unBiblical. NOT!

  1. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27).

Is it? It doesn’t read that way in my New Testament. Peter’s Primacy (Fathers*)

  1. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26).

It does not. Biblical and Jewish Traditional Beliefs About Purgatory

  1. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism,

The Case For Infant Baptism

instrumental music in worship,

Is it? I think the Word of God disagrees with you on this.

indulgences, confession to priests,

Catholic Confession
[FONT=Verdana][size=3]Indulgences are easy. [/size][/FONT]Matthew 18:18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

Matthew 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

the rosary,

The Rosary

the mass,

"Once For All"

and many other things in the Catholic Church?

Oh my, :rolleyes:. The infamous “many other things” allegation, that upon every examination proves to be as fictitious as the rest of a-C propaganda. :yawn:

Is tjhe word ‘Catholic’ written in the Bible? NO!

jean8

I’m really glad you made that assertion.

Acts 9:31 η μεν ουν εκκλησια καθ ολης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας ειχεν ειρηνην οικοδομουμενη και πορευομενη τω φοβω του κυριου και τη παρακλησει του αγιου πνευματος επληθυνετο

I hate feeling stupid. When I looked up Acts 9:31 in several different online Bibles, this is what I see:

31 Now the church had peace throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria; and was edified, walking in the fear of the Lord, and was filled with the consolation of the Holy Ghost.

That’s copied from Douay-Rheims, drbo.org/chapter/51009.htm. Are you referring to the word which is CHURCH in English? Do you mean you would have to look at the original Greek to see EKKLESIA KATHOLOS?

Sometimes, I have a hard time following the conversation, and this is one of them.

ekklesia = Church
Kata holos = Catholic (translated as throughout all; the English word Catholic is a transliteration of the Greek kata holos)

So I guess that would explain why someone wouldn’t notice…the English translations leave out the word for Catholic.

Yes, but Catholic means “universal” or, as we see in Acts, “throughout all” - One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism! Yet another strike against the Bible Alone doctrine, in my opinion. We need an authoritative guide outside the Scriptures to help us in understanding the Scriptures where things aren’t crystal clear.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.