3a3e85 No.10153
>From the Christian confession that there can be only one path to salvation, however, it does not in any way follow that the Jews are excluded from God’s salvation because they do not believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah of Israel and the Son of God.
>That the Jews are participants in God’s salvation is theologically unquestionable, but how that can be possible without confessing Christ explicitly, is and remains an unfathomable divine mystery.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/relations-jews-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20151210_ebraismo-nostra-aetate_en.html
Non sede papists, try and defend this.
Protip: you can't
<John 14:6 NASB — Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
>My doctrine is explicitly contradictory, it's just a mystery! Lol
Sounds familiar…
>Extra ecclesiam nulla salus vs. baptism of desire
>Inherited guilt from Adam vs. salvation for murdered infants
>The church is the queen in Revelation vs. (simultaneously) Mary is the queen in Revelation
>Christ as the mediator vs. Mary as mediatrix
Et cetera
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
f78be3 No.10155
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
b15279 No.10166
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
cb05f1 No.10167
>>10166
>Our church teaches a false gospel, but look! There are Protestants who do too!
This might come as a shock to you, but I don't go to John Hagee's church
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
f78be3 No.10168
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
36c45a No.10297
>try and defend this
Luckily I don't, since it's neither dogma nor a Magisterial declaration.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
f86ffb No.10303
>>10297
What would the Vatican have to put out that's not in one of those categories that would drive you to leave? How can you ignore this?
This is explicitly a false gospel. It is salvation without Jesus.
>Galatians 1:8-9 NASB — But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
If I were listening to a sermon where the pastor said such a thing, I wouldn't just stop going but I would grab my wife and leave immediately.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
86d176 No.10337
>>10303
Nothing. I would remain firm, because Christ is the head of the church, and the Pope is his servant on Earth. I don't deny that this is borderline heresy, but the church has been through numerous rifts where the wheat has been separated from the chaff, including heretical priests and antipopes. Christian Universalism is simply just another attempt by Satan to destroy Jesus' church, but as He said, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
If we cannot rely on our priests, we can reply on our bishops. If we cannot rely on our bishops, we can rely on the Pope. If we cannot rely on the Pope, we can most certainly rely on Christ.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
cb05f1 No.10349
>>10337
This isn't borderline heresy. It is ultimate heresy, it's a false gospel.
What does destruction of the church look like if not teaching a false gospel?
Have you ever considered that Matt 16:18 wasn't talking about Rome?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
82b0e3 No.10426
Related
>>>/christian/824190
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
cb05f1 No.10588
>>10426
The dominant position in the /christian/ thread seems to be that this document doesn't directly contradict the gospel, even though it explicitly does. Some of them are just misreading it, but others are engaging in doublespeak.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
18abe7 No.11645
>>10153
Modern Catholicism is good as dead. The Catholicism of old was more like Christian Identity than any modern brand of Catholicism. Once the church met the Aztecs and stopped teaching non-whites were animals it was all down hill from there. If Protestants were more friendly towards people who venerate Mary I would probably be Protestant by now, maybe even DSCI.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
128279 No.11657
>>10153
that's the politically correct virus infecting the church.
If a based pope comes along all of that trash made up by traitors goes down the drain.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
36ae2f No.11712
>>10349
Prove Peter wasn’t the rock.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
17fa20 No.11718
>>11712
Easy. Peter as the rock contradicts the Bible elsewhere where it says Christ is the foundation, and in context of Matt 16 "this rock" can just as well refer to Peter or the confession that Peter just gave.
https://carm.org/catholic/is-peter-the-rock
The view that the rock here is the confession that Christ is Lord is an ancient one professed by church fathers. https://carm.org/early-church-fathers-peter-the-rock
Once you can get past the presupposition that Rome is the only valid option you'll be free of the cognitive dissonance that comes from defending a pope and a church which is literally and explicitly denying the gospel
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
36ae2f No.11724
>>11718
I used to believe that too. I’m actually a fairly new convert to Catholicism. However, the verse clearly describes Peter as the rock.
Matthew 16:17-19 King James Version (KJV)
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
In the beginning of the verse, Peter’s name is Simon. Christ changes it into Peter in the next verse. The Greek word used for the name of Peter is “Petros”. Read this definition from greek-names.info, “Petros is a very common Greek male name; it comes from the Aramaic and ancient Greek language and it refers to the word petra that means rock.” This is also confirmed in John 1:42 where it says that Peter’s name, which in Aramaic is Cephas, means a stone.
John 1:42 King James Version (KJV)
42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.
The word used for rock is “Petra”. Similarly, the word Petra also means rock. Look what nameberry.com says about the name petra, “The name Petra is a girl's name of Greek origin meaning ‘rock, stone.’” The reason for the difference between Petros and Petra is that Peter is a male, therefore a masculine form of the word Petra had to be used. There are many references to people being a rock in scripture. Abraham is called the rock, the apostles are called foundations, etc. However, when looking at the context of the verse, we see that if Christ changed Peter’s name from Simon into Petros, which means rock, and then said upon this rock, will I build my Church, it is obvious that the rock described here is Peter. Also, the changing of a name shows a change in authority. Abraham has his name changed from Abram to Abraham because he was to be a father of nations.
I advise you to look at these two links for more info. Also, check vaticancatholic.com to see what true Catholicism is and not what the apostate heretic “Pope” Francis claims it is.
http://prophecyfilm.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-bible-proves-teachings-of-catholic.html?m=1#pope
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6KV6PXSODgE&t=1217s
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
400cc0 No.11725
>>11724
>the verse clearly describes Peter as the rock.
Clearly the opposite. Christ is referring to Peter's confession. This is the only position that doesn't put the Bible in contradiction.
>The word used for rock is “Petra”. Similarly, the word Petra also means rock
You didn't even read the article that I linked, so I'm certainly not going to entertain a sede blogspot.
The literary relation between Peter's name and the rock in Matt 16 is not lost unless you accept the doctrine of the papacy, that's a non sequitur.
This of course is an entirely off topic discussion in this thread because Catholics here can't help but resorting to these taking points about Peter and the papcy whenever any criticism is brought up.
>>11645
>If Protestants were more friendly towards people who venerate Mary
Investigate continuing Anglicanism and lutheranism
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
37371f No.11730
>>11724
If petra was referring to Peter it would have kept the masculine gender.
Also while you are at it show where Jesus said the city Peter dies in is in charge of the whole church forever.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
36ae2f No.11731
>>11725
I read the article and it’s more Protestant cope. If you won’t read the article I sent then I’ll just paste it here. The article you sent brought up the fact that Petros and Petra are different so Peter could not be the rock. This is how the article responds.
“The minor distinction between petros and petra only exists in Attic Greek, not Koine Greek. The Gospel was written in Koine Greek, in which both petros and petra meant “rock.” Moreover, there was a word for stone which Jesus could have used. It is lithos. If Jesus wanted to call Peter a stone, but not the rock (petros), then He would have used lithos. But He did not. He used petros, which means rock. But if there is an equation between Peter and the rock, why, then, are two different Greek words used (petros and petra)? The answer is found in the very important fact that Jesus spoke in Aramaic, not in Greek.“
There is no contradiction here. Like I said Abraham is also called the rock. The apostles were called the foundation. You can’t pull a verse from an entirely different part of the Bible and somehow apply it here, just because it also uses the word rock.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
36ae2f No.11732
>>11730
Watch the video. It explains how Peter is shown to be the leader of the Church. It’s a 24 minute video. I’m not gonna copy and paste the entire video here, so please just give it a watch.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
37371f No.11762
>>11732
Video presupposes Vatican authority and then adds in verses to justify it. Much like >>11725
pointed out with Matthew 16.
The part on keys was interesting but too much of a stretch in context of Jesus' priestly mission
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
3da96b No.11764
>>11762
This video on the rock is rock solid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl3pD4l0K5U
>>10153
Luther pills
Luther thought that a Holy War against the Ottomans would be “absolutely contrary to Christ’s doctrine and name.”
Luther thought that the Muslim invaders were to be God’s chastisement for a Europe mired in the ‘horrible abomination of the papal darkness and idolatry’. He wanted his Protestant Christians to die martyrs of the true faith rather than fighting in some allegedly holy war blasphemously prosecuted in Christ’s name.
“Let the Turk believe and live as he will, just as one lets the papacy and other false Christians live.”
Lutherans and Calvinists from Holland and England joined the Ottoman forces at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. In 1683 at Vienna, the Hungarian leader of the Lutherans, the traitorous Imre Thokoly, fought on the side of the Turks.
Too bad that Christians prayed the Rosary and Lepanto was won for Christendom.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
84d253 No.11778
>>10153
>John 14:6 NASB — Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
We have to remember that this is the Logos speaking, Which mutatis mundis in Judaism, specifically Kabbalah is Adam Kadmon, 'universal man'.
>Inherited guilt from Adam vs. salvation for murdered infants
Catholicism doesn't believe in inherited gulit, that is a meme propagated by orthodox
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
4bc9ab No.11853
Whatever you say Protestant/Evangelical Kike lover.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
17fa20 No.11855
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
63b9f9 No.11856
>>11645
What's stopping you from orthodoxy? it's the only remaining christian faith that maintains uncompromised supercessionism.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c00634 No.11857
>>11764
>Lutherans and Calvinists from Holland and England joined the Ottoman forces at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571
Take your bulls— and lies back to /catholic/, papist scum.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
37371f No.11872
>>11764
Thanks I'll stick to the words of Jesus and how the church functioned before Rome decided to schism in 1054 AD.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
