1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Catholic=/=Roman.

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Shiranui117, Aug 6, 2017.

  1. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    65,670
    Ratings:
    +24,079
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    From Wiki:

    Eastern Catholic Churches - Wikipedia

    ... so if someone uses the phrase "the Roman Catholic Church," they're about 98.5% correct.

    The Eastern Rite churches might have personal significance for you, but in grand scheme of things, the Catholic Church is predominantly Western Rite.
     
  2. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,309
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    The Greek pre·sbyʹte·ros is translated “elder” when it refers to those responsible for taking the lead in the congregation.
    But there were no earthly priests in Christianity. Elders took the lead in the congregations. God promised that if Israel kept his covenant they would "become" to Him "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." (Exodus 19:6) However, the priesthood of Aaron’s line was to continue only until the coming of the greater priesthood that it foreshadowed. (Hebrews 8:4, 5) It would endure until the ending of the Law covenant and the inauguration of the new covenant. (Hebrews 7:11-14; 8:6, 7, 13) The offer was first made exclusively to Israel to become Jehovah’s priests serving in God’s promised Kingdom arrangement to come; in time this offer was extended to the Gentiles. (Acts 10:34, 35; 15:14; Romans 10:21)

    Since the Jews expected God's kingdom to be established on earth, they saw the priesthood as something that was an extension of what they already had with an earthly Temple and priesthood, but for Christians, the promise of "becoming" priests was yet future. As John said in his Revelation......"Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years."

    It required a resurrection to become a priest in God's kingdom....and their priesthood and kingship is obviously in the future tense as this verse indicates.

    Do all Scriptural references to “breaking of bread” indicate that Christ’s death was being commemorated? (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, JB) Jesus ‘broke bread’ when food was being shared at a meal even before the Last Supper. (Mark 6:41; 8:6) The bread used by the Jews at that time was not what many people are accustomed to today. When eating it, they would often break or tear off a piece. It was customary to break bread at mealtimes.

    At Acts 20:7 it says..."On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to have a meal, Paul began addressing them, as he was going to depart the next day; and he prolonged his speech until midnight." I see nothing here about this being a special meal, just a meal taken on the first day of the week. The emphasis in this passage is on the length of Paul's address and the young man who fell from the window and died.

    Jesus did not specifically state how often the Memorial of his death was to be kept. However, he instituted it on the date of the Jewish Passover, which was replaced among his disciples by the Memorial of Christ’s death. The Passover was an annual event, celebrated on Nisan 14. Similarly, the Jewish Festival of Unfermented Cakes, the Festival of Weeks (Pentecost), the Festival of Booths, or Ingathering, and the Day of Atonement were all held once a year.

    I have heard the Pope called "Holy Father" which is the sense that Jesus told us not to use. Being 'like a father figure' to someone is not the same as setting yourself up with a title that makes you sound more like God than his servant.

    Paul's relationship with Timothy was recounted in Philippians 2:20-22:
    "But you know the proof he gave of himself, that like a child with a father he slaved with me to advance the good news."

    Timothy was a 'fatherless boy' because his fleshly father was an unbelieving Greek. Paul was a true father figure to him.
    Same with Peter and Mark.

    Introduction to Mark — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
     
  3. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    65,670
    Ratings:
    +24,079
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    And one of those qualifications is that an episkopos should be "husband of one wife," which doesn't match with the Western Rite's current practice. I'm not sure your interpretation works in a Catholic context.

    IIRC (and I may be wrong), I believe the Church's position that "episkopoi" in those passages refers to what we'd call deacons today.
     
  4. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,309
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    We all contribute to a world wide fund that is used for all the needs of the brotherhood globally. The building of places for worship, practical relief in times of natural disasters, where funds are used to give help in the way of food, water and volunteers to help rebuild homes and lives. We have no "cult leader" so you have no idea what you're talking about.

    There are over 8 million of us who see to it that there is no want in our family. Those who have, share with those who do not have. Your observations are not based on facts, but on bias and misinformation. There is no emphasis on money in our brotherhood but no organization on earth can function without it. It never has to be demanded because the Bible says that "God loves a cheerful giver". God is generous and his worshippers follow his example. We cover all our own costs so what does that have to do with you?
     
  5. Shiranui117

    Shiranui117 Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    5,076
    Ratings:
    +2,266
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christian
    Yeah, bishops in the Catholic and Orthodox churches are always celibate, though this only became a rule at the First Council of Nicaea in 325. I'm not sure why that change was introduced, but it isn't a dogmatic thing by any means. Theoretically it could be reversed, and among at least the Ukrainian Orthodox - Kievan Patriarchate (which are out of communion with basically every Orthodox church, but the reason why is complicated as hell and not because of this) they do allow for married men to be elevated to the rank of bishop.

    Somewhat uniquely, it's usually the case that all bishops in the Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches have a monastic background. Unlike in the Roman West, there was never a large decline in monasticism among the Eastern Churches, and the spirituality of these Churches in general is marked by a more ascetic, monastic character.

    Not the case. "Episkopos" actually translates out to "bishop", such as with the term "episcopacy" or "episcopal". "Diakonos" is a deacon. Hooray, linguistics!
     
  6. Shiranui117

    Shiranui117 Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    5,076
    Ratings:
    +2,266
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christian
    If y'all don't mind, I'd rather we split this conversation off into another thread. @Deeje, is it alright if I respond to this post down here in a new thread dedicated to the topic? It's a separate issue from what I wanted to address with this thread.
     
  7. Shiranui117

    Shiranui117 Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    5,076
    Ratings:
    +2,266
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christian
    Oh, of course. Colonialism gave the Roman Church a gigantic leap forward in terms of her population. But despite the small overall percentage of Catholics in the Eastern Catholic Churches, the presence of these Churches makes a profound difference in what the Roman Church can consider dogma or doctrine, and how she is able to define these things. For example, Rome has had to reinterpret the Filioque clause which they added to the Nicene Creed in their Church's use (I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son) in such a way that conflicts with neither Roman nor Byzantine nor Oriental nor Assyrian theology. Likewise, the language surrounding Papal primacy/supremacy has been carefully crafted so as to not stand in open violation to Byzantine and Oriental ecclesiology. The Catholic Church's definitions of Original Sin and Purgatory are also subject to these same pressures, and without the presence of the Eastern Catholic Churches, I can almost guarantee that Rome would have enshrined her own theology as dogma. Certainly, many Traditionalist Roman Catholics still think their particular theology IS dogma, and they've managed to convince a great many in the West, whether Catholic or Protestant or of another religion altogether that this is the case. Many people think they have a problem with Catholicism because they think Catholic teaching is synonymous with Scholastic thought.
     
  8. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    49,444
    Ratings:
    +46,256
    Religion:
    None
    There are so many branches, cults, church's of Christianity, numbering close on 50,000, perhaps more by now, 23 seems a drop in the ocean.

    All (or most) claiming to be the only true christian church because their interpretation of the one (of 200+) versions of the Bible is the correct interpretation.
     
  9. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    65,670
    Ratings:
    +24,079
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    But 1 Timothy 3, in the criteria you referred to, says they should be married, not celibate. That's what I was getting at.

    1 Tim 3:2 (emphasis mine):

     
  10. Shiranui117

    Shiranui117 Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    5,076
    Ratings:
    +2,266
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christian
    Note that the verse specifies that they be the husband of one wife. In other words, bishops cannot have multiple wives. That is what the verse is stipulating. It's not necessarily requiring that all bishops be married.
     
  11. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    65,670
    Ratings:
    +24,079
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Zero wives <> one wife. The verse doesn't say "husband of no more than one wife;" it says "husband of one wife."
     
  12. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,309
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    No problem. :)
     
  13. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,309
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Can I ask where the idea of a monastic existence is even hinted at in the Christian scriptures? It seems to me that being cloistered away in a monastery, taking vows of silence, etc is completely contrary to everything Jesus taught. He wanted his disciples to be evangelists....preachers of God's kingdom. (Matthew 28:19-20; Matthew 24:14)

    Also contrary is the present role of a bishop. Originally, it was nothing close to what it has become in Christendom. How did this happen?

    After Christ’s death his disciples organized themselves into congregations, many of which met in private homes. (Philemon 2) For decades these congregations were cared for by spiritually “older men.” (Acts 20:17, 28; Hebrews 13:17)

    After the death of the apostles, however, there was a falling away from true Christianity. (Acts 20:29, 30) In time, a number of elders elevated themselves above the others and became viewed as bishops having oversight of a number of congregations—something Jesus had warned against. (Matthew 23:9-12)

    The word “church,” which originally applied to Christians themselves, was then also applied to their place of worship—the building itself. It wasn’t long before some bishops sought to have churches that befitted their rank. A new term was thus coined to describe the bishop’s church—the cathedral.

    This term comes from the Greek word kathedra, meaning “seat.” The cathedral was the bishop’s throne, the symbol of his temporal power. From his cathedral the bishop presided over a jurisdiction, the bishopric.

    We can see in many nations the degree of importance placed on the building that housed the bishop's throne. These very expensive and impressive buildings were constructed whilst many in their bishopric were living in extreme poverty. There are still beggars on the steps of the Vatican.

    What "the church" became after the death of the apostles was foretold.....the great apostasy, I believe, is clearly evident. But it took place so long ago, most people are unaware that the Christianity they practice today bears little resemblance to the original. :(

    How did we go from these humble beginnings.....
    [​IMG] ......to this? [​IMG]

    And why is it that the colors associated with "Babylon the great" (the devil's world empire of false worship) are purple and scarlet? (Revelation 17:3-5) These are the colors of royalty, not servants. This prostitute "queen" sits on a scarlet-colored beast, ruling over the kings of the earth, having immoral relations with them. This is spiritual immorality....exerting influence over things that should be none of her business given who is running the show. (1 John 5:19 John 15:18-21)

    [​IMG] [​IMG][​IMG]

    This is not the Christianity that Jesus started IMO.
     
  14. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    40,140
    Ratings:
    +20,619
    Religion:
    disciple of Gandhi, Jesus, & the Dalai Lama
    The apostles acted as priests did in Judaism, plus their traditional leadership role was continued in the early church, but is missing with the JW's.

    It really was from the "agape meal", which is mentioned in the Didache, and it was done on Sunday according to that text.

    Not again. We've gone through this before as it deals with what can happen when going from one language to another.

    BTW, Pa-pa' is Latin for "father", whereas Pa'pa is actually how Pope is pronounced.

    BTW, who is/was married to your mother?
     
  15. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    40,140
    Ratings:
    +20,619
    Religion:
    disciple of Gandhi, Jesus, & the Dalai Lama
    What about Jesus going into the wilderness for 40 days? What did John the Baptist do while in the wilderness?

    They almost without a doubt were using the meditative form of prayer, which Jesus probably also used in the Garden, and a great many Catholics used and still use this as well.

    What about your JW's? Seems that they're totally unaware of this traditional form of prayer used within Judaism and Christianity.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    40,140
    Ratings:
    +20,619
    Religion:
    disciple of Gandhi, Jesus, & the Dalai Lama
    I suppose if they wore green that you would say that they are too earthy, thus children of the forest and not "true believers" in God. The colors of the vestments vary due to the rotation within the liturgical calendar.

    It is truly pathetic that this is the kind of low that the JW's resort to in order to try and make themselves look like "true believers" and all other Christian denominations as being varying degrees of "evil".

    IMO, the JW's only demean themselves when resorting to this kind of disingenuous trashing of other Christian groups in order to sell themselves. Maybe the JW's should actually try to run on their own merits instead.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,309
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    The Christians were thrown out of the temple metis. They used to meet in the porticos of the temple, but when the Pharisees deemed them to be apostates, and hatred against them mounted, they threw them out.

    The apostles did not act as priests at all. Priests could only come from one tribe in Israel and none of them were of the priestly tribe. None of the Pharisees were of the priestly tribe either.
    The Christians met in private homes and dedicated themselves to the study of God's word and to training for the preaching of the good news, as Jesus directed them to do. A body of Elders presided in the congregations, not priests. We base our practices on the first century model.

    The apostles and other Christians knew that a priestly role was assigned to them, but not in any earthly temple. They were to serve God in this capacity only in heaven, after they were resurrected. (Revelation 20:6) The body of older men in Jerusalem were responsible for teaching the congregations what was passed on by the apostles, but Peter and Paul both warned about a coming apostasy. I believe that we can see clearly when it happened. [​IMG]

    These "love feasts" were not commanded by Christ or the apostles and there is no real detail about them in the Bible.
    The day is not significant except that Sunday was the day the pagan Romans honored their sun god. When Catholicism adopted Roman sun worship under the disguise given it by Constantine, the Sabbath established by God with Israel (our Saturday) was changed to Sunday. There was no Biblical command to observe a Sabbath for Christians, however.....it was only for Jews. There is no record of any of God's worshippers keeping a Sabbath before the Law was given. Gentile disciples of Christ were not required to observe a Sabbath at all.

    What does the title "Pontiff" mean metis? Why does the Pope bear the title Pontifex Maximus?
    It is not a Christian title but a pagan Roman one...."The Pontifex Maximus was the high priest of the College of Pontiffs (Collegium Pontificum) in ancient Rome. This was the most important position in the ancient Roman religion" (Wiki)

    Since the apostle Paul made it clear that you cannot fuse or mix truth with falsehood, (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) he said we had to "separate" ourselves from these things in order to be acceptable as God's sons and daughters.

    Jesus said to 'call no man your Father on earth'. He obviously wasn't talking about fleshly fathers....so what did he mean? (Matthew 23:9)

    Oh please metis [​IMG] .....Jesus himself exposed religious error when he saw it. He did not mince words or tip toe around those who were misrepresenting his Father's worship. Unless people are informed, they will go on living in ignorance....and worshipping in vain. (Mark 7:6-8) They cannot make decisions without hearing both sides of the issue. After studying the Bible with many Catholic people, I can honestly say that they were grateful to be informed about the truth. Ignorance benefits no one. :(

    No one has anything to fear from the truth...do they? What have I said that was not true?

    Did Jesus "trash" the teachings and traditions of the Pharisees of his day? He certainly did!.....and in no uncertain terms. Read his condemnation metis and understand why he said those things. (Matthew 23:9-33)

    People challenge our beliefs all the time.....we defend them. The Roman Catholic Church cannot defend what they have done to Christianity.
     
  18. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,309
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    You think people need a monastery to meditate on the word of God? I can do that in my own home.

    On the contrary metis, we are encouraged to meditate deeply on God's word. We just don't use religious traditions passed on by apostate Christianity or Judaism to accomplish it. :confused: I have a personal relationship with God and my communication with him is a frequent part of my day....it is not performed ritualistically by means of beads or icons or statues. It is an informal ongoing dialogue with my best friend. :)
     
  19. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    40,140
    Ratings:
    +20,619
    Religion:
    disciple of Gandhi, Jesus, & the Dalai Lama
    Oh really. Such as when Jesus endowed them with the power to bind or loosen sins, Deeje? Or when they demanded that certain observances be followed even though they are not found in the OT? What do you think a "priest" actually is, Deeje? And did you again forget where the word comes from and the issue of translation?

    That's pure rubbish as the CC never was involved in sun worship. It is entirely dishonest to make up or pass on fabricated lies, Deeje. How unfortunate that you are so blind to reality that your leaders have so thoroughly brainwashed you to believe in absurdities like this..

    Also, do you observe the Sabbath as prescribed by Jewish Law? It is entirely hypocritical for you to say that the church must follow what's in the Law, such as with the Sabbath, and then turn around and say that the church is not bound by the Law because it's Gentile.

    Do you know what an "episcopos" was and is, Deeje? Any clue whatsoever?

    And I note that you didn't answer my question as to who is/was married to your mother. The point being that you have undoubtedly used the term "father" many times, so it is hypocritical for you to use your argument in regards to the CC.

    You ain't Jesus nor God, Deeje.

    Secondly, we have seen you over and over again make up or parrot out and out falsehoods, so you maybe should take your own advice and correct your own errors. Of course I never see you doing that or admitting you could be wrong.

    Except that Jesus operated out of the Pharisee tradition, as did Paul. Jesus had issues with the mainline Pharisee group, but his teachings were quite compatible with more liberal Pharisee elements.
     
  20. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    40,140
    Ratings:
    +20,619
    Religion:
    disciple of Gandhi, Jesus, & the Dalai Lama
    What is utterly irresponsible response the above is. Does it make a difference where one meditates? So, you do it in your home, which is all fine & dandy, so what in the world is so tragically wrong if one does it in a monastery, Deeje? You don't even realize that you have gone against your own position with the absurdity of the above.

    And it is you who says that the CC is "apostate", which is really sort of pathetically bizarre since there are other Christian groups who think that the JW's are "apostate". BTW, I certainly don't agree with them either. .

    I don't care what you may or may not use in worship, so why are you telling others what they may or may not use in worship, Deeje? Ever hear of "mind your own business"?

    But let's take an overlook at what the JW's do. Let's say you and I met one day, and all I did was to pick out ever single what I believe to be a flaw in you. Maybe your nose is too big for me. Maybe your hair color is not of my liking. And then I pay you no compliments whatsoever-- just nit-pick every single flaw I think you have.

    If I did this to you, Deeje, what would you think of my tactic? This is exactly what you and the JW's do all the time, Deeje, namely tearing others down in order to try and make you and your JW's look better.

    Instead, why don't you encourage your denomination and yourself to do something that's not so utterly self-serving, namely to talk about what you believe in without demeaning other denominations that believe in what they believe in for reasons, even if you don't believe in those reasons. Just because someone does something different than you and your JW's doesn't mean they're automatically wrong or "apostate". In the process of tearing down others, including fabricating destructive talking-points, all you are doing is to make yourself and your JW's look very self-serving and child-like.

    IMO, the JW's do have some points that can and should be made, but they all too often go about it in a destructive, not constructive manner. Instead of taking the "Look at me, I'm better than others!" position, maybe they should just put forth what you and they believe and why you and they believe as such, and then let others make their own decisions. After all, this is what any good parent would teach their kids to do, namely to respect others even though they may strongly disagree with them.
     
    #40 metis, Aug 9, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2017
Loading...