They lost me at an old man in a dress being God on earth.
One reason I have NO RESPECT for the CATHOLIC CHURCH
He has the power to add to the scripture and to rule in Christs stead. Close enough for me.
He has the power to add to the scripture and to rule in Christs stead.
No he doesn't!
I was raised in a complete Catholic enviornment in a large city in Canada. I was an alter boy and assisted in the procedures of Mass associated with funerals, marriage and the like.I am no longer a Catholic as I have given up on all religions. I believe the whole religion affair is man made from the Bible all the way up to the infallibility of the Pope. As far as the Jehovahs Witnesses are concerned, I follow the thinking of many of the European countries, they should be banned from all civilized societies along with all or at least most of the extreme orgs.As I was tought by the Christian Brothers which is the learning wing of the Catholic Religion, I have nothing by admiration for these brothers who devote their lives in teaching the young for everything from everyday manners to a good basis in all subjects in a well rounded corriculum.
The Catholic religion has changed considerably since the last mass I attended, but I have kept abrest of the goings on within the church. It is not secretive like the JWS. By the way, they do not adore lfalse idols,they never have. The JWs still say they do and as usual are full of false information. I have noticed that the content of their procedures have changed and are closer to the protestants,ie.,masses are in english instead if Latin, hymns are sung by the throng (in English), general conversation with priests seems to be more informal. etc
I might add that I thik that religion is helpful in most societies today and will be so for some time to come. I find those fanatical religions such as JWs,Muslims, 7th Day adventist and the like serve no earthly purpose in any serious minded society.
The historical record of the church makes it clear that the leaders of the Catholic Church resisted the publishing of the Bible in the vernacular and destroyed many Bibles so as to keep its members from having access to it. This same record clearly implicates the Church and its leaders in the persecution and death of innocent people because they refused to recognize the church as the only means of salvation. The fact that a recent pope acknowledged these sins of the church and asked forgiveness underscores the role the church played during those times.
True, it has altered its course in modern times. But one has to question the motives. The church lost its secular authority and control over the people. Democratic forms of government overthrew those despotic rulers that the church supported and used. The church had no choice. It had to bend to the trends or disappear. But its past record can not be expunged. And it can not be so easily dismissed because of its new "tacking" efforts.
The historical record of the church makes it clear that the leaders of the Catholic Church resisted the publishing of the Bible in the vernacular and destroyed many Bibles so as to keep its members from having access to it.
As someone who read a corrupted Bible and was made to believe lies because of it, you should understand the importance of accurate translation into the vernacular. The Church did ban the possession of vernacular Bibles for the laity without a license; not because the Church wanted to discourage the authentic study of Scripture, but because the Bible was used as a tool for the promotion of heresy. This is no different than what the JWs do with the New World translation today. This problem really got started with the Cathars (Albigensians) in the 13th century. In the Middle Ages, Bibles contained glosses, either in between verses or in the margins. These glosses served to guide the reader's interpretation of the text. Even decently translated Bible could contain glosses which might lead the reader an incorrect understanding of the text. Or the translation of the Bible itself could be perverted to support a heretical doctrine. For these reasons, some very poor and incorrectly translated bibles were burned. Luther's translation removed several books from the Bible without any authority whatsoever; he even wanted to excise James out of his version of the Bible, calling it an "epistle of straw", if I recall correctly. The neutered 66 book Bible is the standard to this day outside the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. Anti-Catholics also assume that because there were relatively few bibles, knowledge of Scripture was limited. Untrue. Catholics transmitted biblical knowledge in other forms. There were books which paraphrased stories in the Bible as is done today in children's books. The visual arts abounded in Scriptural themes. Stained-glass windows were the poor man's Bible. There were Miracle plays, which were the forerunners of modern Western theatre, as well as poems recounting Bible stories. Only a minority of people could read during the Middle Ages. The assumption driving this myth of bible-banning is that the Church, during the Middle Ages, was a big bad oppressor who wanted the flock to be ignorant so that it wouldn't challenge its power and doctrines.
So the charge that the Church was against knowledge of Scripture is entirely unfounded. It's true that in some periods and some places vernacular versions of the Bible were rare or non-existent, but that's not the same thing as saying that the Church did not want the laity to read the Bible.
This same record clearly implicates the Church and its leaders in the persecution and death of innocent people because they refused to recognize the church as the only means of salvation. The fact that a recent pope acknowledged these sins of the church and asked forgiveness underscores the role the church played during those times.
These people were guilty of heresy. Is death an appropriate punishment for heresy? Today, we say in the negative. No it is not. However hundreds of years ago people had a different answer. Penalties were very stiff in Protestant countries as well. Religion did not separate along political borders by mere coincidence. The monarchs set the religion in their dominions and then brought about submission. The persecution of Catholics in Protestant England was particularly fierce as priests were imprisoned and put to death for saying Mass. Inquisition is not unknown to Protestantism. The Geneva Inquisition was a Calvinist one in which Calvin himself participated and a man named Michael Servetus was burned at the stake for his universalist views. Luther's words even caused the deaths of 100,000 peasants when he found that they were taking freedom of religion a little too liberally. In general it is difficult and chronocentric for us to judge all of this because times were much different and societies went about keeping order in different ways than today. There have been abundant acts of deceit, murder, and evil deeds throughout history, on all fronts of Christianity. The Catholic church is certainly not innocent.
The church lost its secular authority and control over the people.
This is true. One of the mistakes of Catholic Church was the assumption of temporal power. For a brief period, and in some ways, it was beneficial. But Jesus' kingdom is not of this world. It cannot be won or maintained by the sword.
This criticism can be leveled at Evangelicals (and others) today - it is not possible to vote God's kingdom into office. BTS
Your information only proves the arrogance of the presumption of the Church in assuming that it was the judge and jury of Bible translation as well as what was acceptable faith. It's persecution of other religious groups in the name of God for "heresy" assumes that the Church was the only true representative of God. (Where have I heard this before?) And to try to justify this by citing the examples of some Protestant leaders who followed the same course is hardly a valid argument. Once a religious group claiming to be Christian oversteps the principles and teachings of Christ they are no longer truly Christian whether Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox. Wasn't it Christ who taught we should love even our enemies? Or is it your premise that as long as one is non-Catholic the Church is prefectly justified to murder any "heretical" person?
The Middle Ages are also known as the "Dark Ages" for a very good reason. The church kept the general population in complete ignorance except for those in the highest ranks of the Church itself. Even priests and nuns were often illiterate at the time. The Church conceded to publish the Bible in the vernacular when it realized the only source for its own members would be those "heretical" editions that were becoming widespread. The average Catholic knew more about its saints and relics than the gospels. (Both brought more wealth into the church.) One may try to white-wash the deplorable historical record of the Church in these matters. But it stands to condemn the unchristian actions that indelibly stain the Church.
Here is one of many sorces that can be found on the catholic church- http://www.chick.com/information/religions/catholicism/sevenhills.asp This one has footnotes for it's sources. I want to re-state the fact that I have nothing against the people that are members of the catholic organization or any individual associated with them. I have family members who are members of the catholic church. They didn't believe me either until they did their own research. They then concluded it wasn't like that anymore and stayed in.
The fact is there are nutcases in any religion. But more important question is, where is the greatest concentration of them when you look at percentages.
I sincerely doubt there are many religions that can compare to witnesses in that respect. I'm yet to see so many nutcases in one place who strangely somehow believe they deserve to live forever and all those they gossip at Watchtower on Sundays deserve to die. What a "Godly people"
Funny how they would accuse JWs of paying others to convert. I read years ago that when Catholic missionaries went to primitive areas they bribed people with food and some medical care. I think the natives had to participate in some indoctrination in order to receive anything. Just odd they would accuse JWs of doing what they did.