🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

Zone1 After having learned new information, I am not sure where the real Catholic Church is..

Except He didn't. He remains, as always, Jewish. We are not told to save ourselves. If that were possible, Christ's work on the cross would not have been necessary. We are not told to save a church. We are the bride of Christ. Not a church. We come from all different denominations.
We are called Saints. Not by some Pope, not for some miracle we performed. Because we are believers. it is used about 70 times in the NT, and always refers to believers, and not as one special group.

Here is one of God's reason for sharing the Holy Spirit with us:
Ephesians 4:12, : For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.

The body of Christ, not the church. You. You are a saint. God said so, not a Pope. Believe God.
The Body of Christ is THE CHURCH/KINGDOM OF GOD/KINGDOM OF HEAVEN/HOUSEHOLD OF GOD.....all are synonymously used in scripture, they are discriptive terms all describing the same enity......the church that Christ Spiritually constructed (Matthew 16) Within this one chapter Jesus describes it as a Kingdom and and in the next breath His church.

How can the church be both a Bride and a Body? The 2 terms are not exclusive.......meaning each does not prohibit the use by the other...i.e., each does not have its own exclusive meaning......they are both discriptive terms when something is known by a variety of different names because one term can't describe the entirety of the thing or person being named.......its a trait or characteristic type of description not a proper Sir Name. Example: Take someone named John whose profession is running a local deli that sells meat to a certain coustomer base.........say the selling of Kosher meat to the local Jewish community. He can be known as Jack the Butcher..........John the Jewish deli owner.......etc., Different words discribe the same person and the words are commonly and easily identified as to whom they are referring.

The "Church" is used to translate the Greek word "ekklesia".......a literal translation means "called out"....its used to descibe Christians as being called out from a world of sin (Heb.12:23) or can be used in scripture to mean that Chrisitians in a certain region who are called out to worship (1 Cor. 1:2).

"Kingdom"? but being called out does not describe why we (Christians) are called out ........a group of people can be "called out" to form a mob or a crowd and that does not make that called out group Christians. Thus Jesus' church (those called out by Jesus) is also known as a KINGDOM with each member being called a "citizen" of that Kingdom (Col. 1:13).......that descriptive title tells everyone that Christians are bound to live by certain laws and regulations that pertain specifically to that group with Jesus the Christ its LAWGIVER (Luke 6:46).

"Household of God"? In the typical "kingdom" as known by men......just because you live under the same laws and rules does not indicate that you are in close relationships with everyone in that kingdom....each has different social positions and status. But......Christians are indentified as having a close relationship with each member, they even call one another Brother or Sister in Christ. This makes each individual Christian a member of God's family (Eph. 2:19, 1 Tim. 3:15) This is why we refer to one another as brother or sister. Its the love that each member has for one another that defines them as disciples of Christ or Christians (John 13:35)

"Body"? The church is identified as the BODY OF CHRIST (not literally but symbolic) to emphasize the unity of it membership. The scriptures define unity as the CHIRST being the head of the body, just as a literal body is composed of different parts and organs with different functions and designs each member has a specific place and function within the Body...i.e., the church that Christ constructed as its foundation and head, all members might perform different functions but all are important to the whole body, all are required for the body to function correctly (1 Cor. 12:12-27)

"Bride"? This term captures the nature of the CHURCH. The church is called the Bride of Christ....again (Symbolic not Literal).....Christ is seen as the groom. With the "actual" marriage taking place when the membership reaches heaven (the abode of the Father) -- Rev. 21:2 In order for this marriage to take place the Bride must be presented as pure.....sin free, like a virign on her wedding day (again its symbolic) -- Eph. 5:22-33. Its about the church being like God designed the natural hierarchy in the Garden........the wife is submissive to the husband, thus each church member must live a life in preparation in the exptation of being pure and sin free when Jesus comes back to claim His bride.
 
Last edited:
We have had NO pope since 1958

no other view makes sense
The true chruch as described in the Holy Bible.......has never had a single "POPE". Not even the orginal Apostles of Christ were described as one being the superior of the others. Even Peter, who was given the "keys" to the Kingdom of God......had to stand up with the 11 (meaning equality among them) in order to exercise the use of those keys, "Repent and be batpized in the name of (who? Peter the 1st Pope...or).........in the name of Jesus Christ."
 
The true chruch as described in the Holy Bible.......has never had a single "POPE".
I read this far

I don't find it productive ofme or anyone to respond to those who have not been through a RCIA class to learn TRUE Catholicism. And these days you'd have to go to a SSPX for that or you may get lied to.. God knows..

In any case, I would never try to argue with someone on trigonometry, for example

since I know NOTHING about it

doesn't stop the antiCatholics though.. That alone shows that no one trying to find the truth should ever listen to them
 
I read this far

I don't find it productive ofme or anyone to respond to those who have not been through a RCIA class to learn TRUE Catholicism. And these days you'd have to go to a SSPX for that or you may get lied to.. God knows..

In any case, I would never try to argue with someone on trigonometry, for example

since I know NOTHING about it

doesn't stop the antiCatholics though.. That alone shows that no one trying to find the truth should ever listen to them

In that case you shouldn't be arguing about Christ's Church for the same reason...
 
I read this far

I don't find it productive ofme or anyone to respond to those who have not been through a RCIA class to learn TRUE Catholicism. And these days you'd have to go to a SSPX for that or you may get lied to.. God knows..

In any case, I would never try to argue with someone on trigonometry, for example

since I know NOTHING about it

doesn't stop the antiCatholics though.. That alone shows that no one trying to find the truth should ever listen to them

Indeed I am anit-Catholic, just as I am anti-ANY TYPE OF FALSE DOCTRINE that cannot be located in the Word of God, that professes to be Truth from God. What kind of Christian would I be is I called good evil and evil good? No one can have 2 masters, truth and tradition. Jesus explained this in Matthew 23........when you allow tradition to overcome the actual written law of God, you make the word of God into NON EFFECT. Biblical Isarel was allowed to be destroyed for allowing such doctrine in the 1st century A.D. God does not change.......His word does not change, what was true in the 1st century is just as true in the 21st century, regardless of how soceity has evolved. Truth does not evolve or it was never truth to begin with.

I find it amusing that you present an opinion that declares there has been no true Catholic Church since the middle of the 20th century. I would think a good example of the heresies promoted by the RCC would have at least been dated to the late 19th century when THE POPE declared himself an "infallible" human being.......comparing himself to the sinless Son of God...aka, the Son of Man, Christ Jesus when the scriptures clearly state the opposite. Yet........history demonstrates that Pope Pius lX declared himself "infallible" in 1870.

Infallible: incable of error or failure. How can anyone defend, might alone allow such heresies to be promoted as Christian Truth?

"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.........If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."-- 1 John 1:8-10 (thus everyone is infallible if you follow the logic of the Pope that declared all Popes as infallible human beings........because they are washed/cleansed by the blood of the Christ). Even the RCC's first POPE according to their errant mistranslation of the Matthew 16.......Failed/betrayed/lied about Jesus 3 times before the cock crowed. (John 18)

Christian Faith has been delivered ONCE FOR ALL.........by the saints of the 1st century (Jude 3)

Is that not the point?:dunno: Catholic's are anti-scripture and pro tradition with the POPE self professing to have the authority to present new revelations for the faith of Christitianity (its nothing but dogmatic heresies not found in the actual Word of God) with the majority of its doctrine coming not on the basis of "God said....." as found in scripture....but coming from doctrine originated by human tradition. The doctrine of the supposed "Universal Chruch"...i.e., the Roman Catholic Church is not found to exist when anyone searches the scriptures to see for themselves that which is being taught is based upon the truth presented by the Christ and the Aposltes who were commissioned by the Christ to originate doctrine for the N.T. church. The Apostles were the foundation of the N.T. church.......there can be but ONE FOUNDATION. (Eph. 2:20)

Regardless of what is taught when one is a member of a false cult such as the RCC.........you do not have to be an expert to open the canon of the Holy Bible and compare the tradition taught by the RCC conflicts drastically with the actual content of the Holy Scriptures. One can become so educated that he/she might be in possession of PhD in a certain discipline...but if everything they were taught was based upon lies.......their PhD becomes useless when compared with the simple truth that is backed by evidences in fact.

The evidences for any Christian is found in the Holy Scriptures. Why? Because ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired by God........inspired is translated from a Greek Term that literally means "GOD BREATHES".
 
Last edited:
I will never change in my knowledge of Church history along with my experiences in the CC (Catholic Church) which inform me that the Catholic Church is THE Church Christ founded. That has never and will never be in question.

However, I had thought that SSPX was the true Catholic Church. Then I read some info from Novus Ordo Watch that again makes me question things.

I read many things on this topic last night; the thing that sticks most in my mind is this:

NO Watch says (my words) that the Church cannot err when declaring someone a saint; therefore the apparently fake popes who "canonized" modern popes who have died (and I heard there were no miracles attached to those popes), well.. #1, it is wrong to say that the canonizations were not infallible, as the SSPX camp supposedly does. SSPX rightly says that Vatican II (my words again) should not be adhered to because it taught heresy. But they are not seda vacantists in that they do not say tht the Chair of Peter is empty, just that the pope we have now, along with others before him recently, are not real popes (or something to that effect).

OK, so people like me, Cahtolics like me, do not know what to believe. I know I speak for probably millions of other Catholics here.. all of us confused, sometimes not even having a clue just how confused we are.. trying to make sense of all this insanity since Vat II

Even my hero Archbishop Lefebvre exhibited some confusion on what to make of the false popes. No one can blame him (us). We have never seen anything like this massive Takeover (Vatican II, a NON-dogmatic Council). It is a new thing in the Church's history.

So anyway, where was I? I don't know.. that's the problem.. Who knows what to think?

But I will keep studying this issue. All I "know" with certainty is that the last valid, truly Catholic pope was Pius XII and that Vatican II was a fake Council, as it were.. something all Catholics, confused or not, need to totally IGNORE (after studying up on it, of course, as I have).
Jesus was never with the religion that came out of Rome. Your religion teaches the Pope is infallible, yet the last Pope was forced to retire because of his homosexual acts, He moved in with his secretary( boyfriend) after he retired. Years ago they used to sell salvation. I am telling you truthfully--their bloodguilt has amassed to the heavens. No followers of Jesus ever were mislead to kill for a man named Hitler. Your religion stood on both sides killing each other-- Not the Love Jesus spoke of-EVER. It was satans will. LOOK.
 
St Benedict LaBre was a TRUE Catholic.. who lived in a time of true Catholicism, in other words: before Vatican II all but destroyed Catholicism (died only a few years b4 the French Revolution).

What strikes me about him is that, once he heard that it was difficult to enter Heaven.. (learned when very young) he did all he could, left everything behind, etc, to find that Narrow Way to Heaven. Miracles happened when he was alive as well as after he passed (even more after).

I got to thinking about that novus ordo publication that had a story about him. :(

What strikes me at this point is that the author of that just HAD to make the implication that LaBre suffered from "mental illness" possibly autism, etc.. said that autistic people have a tendency to think in black and white terms.. "rigid"

In other words, IMO, it seems the NO Church (so called Church) wants to send the message to all its members who read the article on St LaBre: DON'T do what LaBre did! We need MONEY, so you can't give up all your possessions to the poor [like Jesus said to, btw] to follow this dude..

I can't judge the motives of any given writer, but if I can come to this kind of conclusion.. others undoubtedly have themselves, esp those who have studied the nefarious Vatican II and know the extent to which it has messed everything up in the Church.. and people are suffering the egregious consequences of that.

Don't let yourself be lied to vis a vis the NO 'church'

which means don't buy everything you read in a NO publication. I advise don't read anything not approved by the Society of St Pius X, the true Catholic Church.
 
Jesus was never with the religion that came out of Rome.
I stopped here, at the first error I came to (also first sentence)

Again, you do not know what I know, so I cannot respond Well, I cannot respond in a way that would be efficacious.. therefore, I will not respond. I don't believe in wasting time. If you want to know what I know, study what I have studied..

ha ha.. I will just bet you do that
 
I stopped here, at the first error I came to (also first sentence)

Again, you do not know what I know, so I cannot respond Well, I cannot respond in a way that would be efficacious.. therefore, I will not respond. I don't believe in wasting time. If you want to know what I know, study what I have studied..

ha ha.. I will just bet you do that
Their own translating expose them as false religion.
 
Indeed I am anit-Catholic, just as I am anti-ANY TYPE OF FALSE DOCTRINE t
Who are YOU to say what is false doctrine?

Oh, that's right.. All Protestants are their own pope (since The Father of Protestantism, Luther tossed out the papacy 500 years ago and people follow him and other humans rather than Christ)

now we have 60,000 "christian" denominations, but of course still only ONE Church founded by Christ.

But hey.. I give up. I realize I cannot convince people of .. anything if they have minds 100% closed
 
Who are YOU to say what is false doctrine?

Oh, that's right.. All Protestants are their own pope (since The Father of Protestantism, Luther tossed out the papacy 500 years ago and people follow him and other humans rather than Christ)

now we have 60,000 "christian" denominations, but of course still only ONE Church founded by Christ.

But hey.. I give up. I realize I cannot convince people of .. anything if they have minds 100% closed

Yes the 1 religion that has Jesus serves the Abrahamic God Israel served= A single being God=YHWH(Jehovah) He was never a trinity.
 
The true chruch as described in the Holy Bible.......has never had a single "POPE". Not even the orginal Apostles of Christ were described as one being the superior of the others.
Peter is always the first one listed. In one part of the Gospels it says

Peter and the Disciples
 
Yes the 1 religion that has Jesus serves the Abrahamic God Israel served= A single being God=YHWH(Jehovah) He was never a trinity.
What's wrong w/ the Trinity belief?

You yourself have a physical body
a mental one (brain)
and a heart (emotions)

yet you are ONE person

God is complex to us mere mortals. And yet I have never had a hard time believing in the Trinity.. don't u/stand why others do..
 
Their own translating expose them as false religion.
your translating exposes your beliefs as a false religion

So who is correct?

Only God knows?

Yet God obviously wants us to know certain things. I found certainty when I returned to the Catholic Church.. don't like the "human" aspect thereof but the Original Catholic Church.. no problem

Even most Catholics do not realize that the Berg Church as I call it is not the true Catholic Church.. We have been deceived.. but some of us found out we were being deceived..
 
Protestantism is without any other foundation than its own say-so.

Who is correct?

:102:
As genuine protestation that became associated with the reform and "Protestantism" was to declare direct connection with the Gospels and denounce clerical corruption, it is obvious. "Protestantism" does not declare itself correct; it declares Jesus is correct.
If you're comfortable with your state of faith, that's fine. Attacking others can't do much more for you.
 
Jesus was never with the religion that came out of Rome. Your religion teaches the Pope is infallible, yet the last Pope was forced to retire because of his homosexual acts,
what the hell are you talking about?

I have NEVER heard of Benedict being gay.. Please! Enough with the BS already.. Prove it.

And the Church does not teach the pope is infallible in every word he says.. so once again.. you may want to study the topic before acting like some kind of expert.

Non-Catholics don't have a clue about the CC (but I guess it's the old human pride thing.. can't admit to not knowing something)
 

Forum List

Back
Top