The Catholic Church on Purgatory:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm
The Catholic Church on Baptism:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02258b.htm
http://www.catholic.com/library/Infant_Baptism.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/Baptism_Immersion_Only.asp
**REFUTING ZKUEKER88′S CLAIMS**
1. Unbiblical
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0010sbs.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/purgatory.asp
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0511sbs.asp
http://www.catholic.com/library/Roots_of_Purgatory.asp
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a94.htm
http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap090400.htm
http://www.smcenter.org/evidence.htm
http://www.smcenter.org/teachings_does_purgatory.htm
http://www.smcenter.org/teachings_purgatory.htm
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html
2. Undermines Christ’s Death
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0010sbs.asp
(Talks about it towards the bottom of the article)
–Salvation is a Process:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0502sbs.asp
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0203sbs.asp
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/salvation.html#salvation-VII
http://www.catholic.com/library/assurance_of_salvation.asp
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1991/9109chap.asp
3. Justification is by Faith Alone:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9710chap.asp
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9911fea1.asp
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a126.htm
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a134.htm
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a53.htm
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/justification.html
4. Purgatory is a Work
(Catholics do not believe purgatory is a work, but rather, a grace from God)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0010sbs.asp
(Towards the bottom of the article)
Duration : 0:9:13
You are impossible. …
You are impossible. You deny piece of evidence after piece of evidence.
Never post on my videos again.
“Moreover, councils …
“Moreover, councils are joint decisions between the Pope and the Bishops. ”
did Clement ever say in the Letter…i Clement…did he signed the Letter..NO
wishful thinking again!
as i said a lot of scholars point out that there was a “multiplicity of ELDERS” at rome NO POPE
Actually, that …
Actually, that canon was presented while the representatives of the West were out. It was an attempt by the East to diminish the power of the West. The East and West would eventually separate, becoming the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.
Actually, the …
Actually, the letter was written by Clement I alone. It is customary for the Bishop of Rome to refer to himself in the royal plural (”us,” “we,” “our,” etc). The pope does it even today.
Given that detail, it becomes obvious that Clement umed a great deal of authority.
“Canon 28 of …
“Canon 28 of Council of Chalcedon was never ratified by Pope Leo; that was a disagreement between the West and the East”
why would he ratified it when it meant no more “authority” for him..lol?
where was the pope of rome when council of Nicea took place..yes,in rome,isn’t that nice….
“Clement I”
the …
“Clement I”
the Letter was written by the ELDERS at rome…Clement NEVER claims to be the “head bishop” so your attempt is futile…a i said OUT OF CONTEXT quotes and “imposing” ideas on the writing of a father is NO PROF
Canon 28 of Council …
Canon 28 of Council of Chalcedon was never ratified by Pope Leo; that was a disagreement between the West and the East. Canon 6 of Nicaea does not contradict the pope’s primacy. Moreover, councils are joint decisions between the Pope and the Bishops.
have you ever read …
have you ever read Canon 6 of council of Nicea(325 ad)
Canon 28 of council of Chalcedon(451ad) ?
the list that you’ve sent (fathers that lived before those councils) how can you claim that those fathers are profs of your papal supremacy when 100 of yrs after their deaths the 2 councils i’ve mentioned had NO IDEA of your popes “supremacy” ?
No. Quotes from the …
No. Quotes from the early Christians detailing the superiority the Bishop of Rome had above the rest of the Bishops. In essence, proof of the pope’s supremacy. I have taken that last comment as an affirmation. The quotes have been sent.
“Upon request, I …
“Upon request, I can send to your message box quote upon quote from early Christian demonstrating the superiority of the pope.”
quotes form the ‘fathers’ that had something nice to say about Peter,right?
i know of those ‘profs’
Once again, I have …
Once again, I have no desire to debate you on evolution. You clearly have no credentials in biology as it is, and this topic has no bearing on the Catholic Church.
We are here to discuss theology, not biology. Take it up with a science text book, not me. I request that we drop this conversation on evolution immediately.
The supremacy of …
The supremacy of the pope can be vindicated in documents predating the forgeries you mentioned. So, no, the papacy does not require these forgeries, nor did it ever. All I need is the writings of the early Christians.
Upon request, I can send to your message box quote upon quote from early Christian demonstrating the superiority of the pope. Just say the word.
“I believe in …
“I believe in evolution based on what sound science has demonstrated.”
what exactly do you mean by “sound science” ?
as for the pope’s comment…garbage?
“No, the supremacy …
“No, the supremacy of the Pope has nothing to do with those documents. I have never heard of them, and I can do just fine without them”
well,if you’ve made up your mind,then i guess you can not be bother with FACTS!
“Pope’s higher position in the Church using Scripture (as I did), and early Christian writings. ”
all you’ve shown is wishful thinking,out of context quotes,anachronisms and reading into the Bible concepts that the authors never intended…
any comment on the early councils?
I do not believe in …
I do not believe in evolution based on anything any pope has said. I believe in evolution based on what sound science has demonstrated. And by the way, the pope never said that evolution was true; he simply stated that evolution has gained more ground than it ever has. It is “more than just a theory.”
The Church, however, has no official position on this issue.
“However, it is …
“However, it is usually best to listen to what the Pope has to say. He is always trying to tell us something wise.”
in the case of “Evolution” take my word…dismiss pope’s fairytale !
I have never …
I have never checked those documents with anybody else before. I have always looked at them by myself. They are precious portrayals of the Catholic Church in its early stages.
No, the supremacy of the Pope has nothing to do with those documents. I have never heard of them, and I can do just fine without them. I can demonstrate the Pope’s higher position in the Church using Scripture (as I did), and early Christian writings.
“I have never heard …
“I have never heard of those documents, nor do I know of any Catholic scholar who has ever used them to vindicate the papacy. To my knowledge, we have done just fine on the confirmed documents from early Christians.”
maybe it’s time you checked them out by yourself?
“I find your mention of those documents irrelevant, being that I would have never brought them up. ”
the “supremacy of RCC/pope” is BUILT ON FORGERIES…
If it is not ex …
If it is not ex cathedra, then we may indeed dismiss it. However, it is usually best to listen to what the Pope has to say. He is always trying to tell us something wise.
I understand that evolution is an extremely and unlikely process. That is why I believe God’s divine hand was involved. Without God, evolution becomes an unlikely, impossible chance. In sum, evolution is actually proof of God; an absolute miracle.
“Regardless of what …
“Regardless of what Pope John Paul II might have said, he did not say it ex cathedra’
so,if is not ex cathedra you can simply dismiss it?
“I believe that evolution is true. It is a scientific fact, which I have easily discovered from my work in advanced placement biology”
well,i know a bit of math and i can tell you that the “evolution” is not true….the simplest living cell need AT LEAST 309 genes in order to exist…so between 1 and 309 (evolutionary steps) you get the idea…
I have never heard …
I have never heard of those documents, nor do I know of any Catholic scholar who has ever used them to vindicate the papacy. To my knowledge, we have done just fine on the confirmed documents from early Christians.
I find your mention of those documents irrelevant, being that I would have never brought them up.
“I would not have …
“I would not have quoted from the Donation of Constantine, nor from the Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals.”
for 100s of yrs your church used those forgeries to prove their temporal and spiritual “supremacy” today,you have to cover your ears and eyes and talk loud when someone mentions those forgeries….the papacy was built on “sand”
I am not here to …
I am not here to discuss the issue of evolution. The Church has no official teaching on that matter. Regardless of what Pope John Paul II might have said, he did not say it ex cathedra, so it is not considered a teaching of the Church.
However, on a personal note, I believe that evolution is true. It is a scientific fact, which I have easily discovered from my work in advanced placement biology. If evolution is untrue, all of biology makes no sense. That is my personal stance, not the Chruch’s.
“Whether …
“Whether Catholicism is liberal or conservative in areas is irrelevant.”
i’m talking LIBERAL in their theology !!!
pope John Paul 2 claiming that the “evolution” is true…that type of nonsense….
I would not have …
I would not have quoted from the Donation of Constantine, nor from the Pseudo-Isidorean Decretals.
I would have quoted from the writings of the early Christians dating preferably from the first to the third centuries.
Add A Comment