Why do you dislike Catholicism? It's the purest Christianity there is...

Not my fault Abrahamic religions have all these lame and boring rules around sex. Y'all just don't know how to enjoy life and it's why you wanna kill everyone.

Don't forget
>Constant mingling in European politics and warfare ending up with Rome being fucking sacked by your own Hapsburg lackeys, innocent people slaughtered and the Swiss guard decimated all while the Pope fucks off to his hidey hole and survives.

She'd have told everyone and laughed at you
Life is not like your moving comics

>It's the purest Christianity there is
if anything that would be the orthodox church

Islam lets you have 3 wives and some muslim countries let you have more than 3 if you're in a position of power

I can't understand how catholics are still a thing when Lorenzo Valla proved the donation of Constantine was false 600 years ago

>first argument is indulgences
That’s when we all stop reading. Muh indulgences is a failed argument.

>the church can’t make people pay these unfair prices! The church is fallable! Man is flawed!
>Literally every religious deviation from there is named after one Human man.

Lutherans and Lutheran derivitives btfo

>Political lie committed 100’s of years after Christ
>Proving it was a lie tears down gods church

Could you grasp at some thicker straws?

Why can't Catholics and Protestants make peace?

youtube.com/watch?v=jorfQa3VyZc

Catholicism is for nonces and fat swarthy Meds.

/thread

What the fuck are you even trying to say? There's nothing in the Bible supporting the idea of a Pope. In fact, it's quite the opposite.

Would you like a satanic organization that murdered over a hundred million innocents in the past thousand years?

Because that's Catholicism.

I'd say you were wrong, but you already know that.

Look, the barbarian can read and talk.

Jesus never claimed to be God, never claimed there was a trinity, never demanded worship, and never called for an abolishment of the Law.

>purest

>Jesus never claimed to be God, never claimed there was a trinity
He claims repeatedly to be the son and refers to the aspect of God the father throughout.
>never demanded worship
Says he's the mediator.

Catholicism is Paganism plus money. It's spooky swag. What's not to like?

spic

>Jesus never claimed to be God,
John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

John 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

John 10:30 I and My Father are one.”

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

Revelation 1:8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”

>never claimed there was a trinity,
“If you love Me, keep My commandments. And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever— the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

>never demanded worship,
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

>and never called for an abolishment of the Law.
Jeremiah 31:31 [ A New Covenant ] “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—

Luke 22:20
Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.

Matthew 9
No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment, and the tear is made worse. Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”

>John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

For you catholics, see the error of your blasphemous beliefs by changing Jesus to Mary, and calling Mary the Mother of God.

To be fair, none of the passages about creating a new covenant says anything about abolishing the old one.

“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—

not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt,

My covenant which they broke,

though I was a husband to them,says the Lord.

You neither understood the parable of the wineskins, nor the nature of the new covenant as prophesied by Jeremiah.

So here's Paul to clear things up for you.

Hebrews 8:13
In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

>For you catholics, see the error of your blasphemous beliefs by changing Jesus to Mary, and calling Mary the Mother of God.
Disingenuously pretending you don't know how honorifics or linguistics works for the sake of a nonexistent point is garbage.

Jesus said he was the Son of God. That is a claim to being God.

You say Mary is the Mother of God. That too is a claim to being God.

>Disingenuously pretending you don't know how honorifics or linguistics works for the sake of a nonexistent point is garbage.

It's an abomination and blasphemous, not polite and entitled.

>the RCC calling Mary the Mother of God is garbage.

Finally, something we can agree on.

I want to jack off into her toilet and make her watch

Why is it more pure than Orthodox? Justify yourself.

"[18] And I say to 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 to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." Mt. 16:18-19

>With this verse, catholics believe Peter, an illiterate jew commissioned by Jesus as apostle to the circumcised, traveled to rome to become the pope of uncircumcised latins.

>He claims repeatedly to be the son and refers to the aspect of God the father throughout.

It also refers to angels, David, and Israel as being God's sons. They're still the creation, not the creator.
>Says he's the mediator.
Moses was a mediator as well, but that didn't make him God.

But he did, and the proof that he did is in one of his Epistles, which he hands with "I greet you my brothers from Babylon," which was the name for Rome.

>Book of John

Yeah yeah every Gospel following Mark gets more dramatic and more flirtatious with blasphemy. But even in those Jesus doesn't claim to be God. As Moses was god to Pharoah, for a short time Jesus, as Messiah was a god to the Hebrews, but that is a temporary elevation.

>John 10:30 I and My Father are one.”

One in purpose, not one in the sense that they're 2/3's of the same person. That's insane and contrary to what the OT establishes about the nature of God.

>“If you love Me, keep My commandments. And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever— the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

And when they asked him what the greatest commandment was what did he say?

Mark 12:29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

The most basic and fundamental quality that all the prophets ascribe to God is His Oneness.

that's hot

...

And I say thou art Peter, and upon thou, Peter, will I build my church....

>Things Jesus never said

What rubbish. You have no idea who wrote the gospels, to whom, and why.

>The most basic and fundamental quality that all the prophets ascribe to God is His Oneness.

Trinity

John 1 says that the Word (Jesus) was with God and was God…..and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
In John 10:30 Jesus said that He and the Father are one.
In John 14:9 He said that anyone who has seen Him has seen the Father.
In Colossians 1:15 Paul wrote that Jesus is the (visible) image of the invisible God.
In Hebrews 1:3 Jesus is called the exact representation of God’s glory
In Hebrews 1:8 God Himself called Jesus God.
God’s Spirit is presumed to be one and the same with God just as your spirit is presumed to be one and the same with you. So if God and Jesus are one and the same, and God and His Spirit are one and the Same, then the three are one.

There is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 45:5-6). Yet there are three persons presented as deity in Scripture: the Father (John 6:27; Colossians 1:3), the Son (John 1:1-3, 14; 8:24; 20:28-29; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1; Hebrews 1:10-12) and the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17; Acts 5:3-4; 2 Samuel 23:2-3; 2 Corinthians 3:18). Lastly, these three are presented as distinct persons (John 8:16-18; Luke 11:1; 3:21-22; Galatians 4:6). Thus from Scripture we learn that although there is one God, there are three distinct persons who are deity. So the Trinity is the biblical position to hold to once one examines what Scripture teaches.

OT

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1).
The Hebrew word for God is Elohim. Elohim is a plural noun but it is used here with a singular verb bara. Elohim speaks of the true God and is always used with a singular verb. In some sense God is both singular and plural

God Says Let Us
Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness… (Genesis 1).
The phrase let us again gives the idea of plurality. The word us cannot refer to angels because angels do not create

And now the Sovereign LORD has sent me, with his Spirit. This is what the LORD says - your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel: I am the LORD your God, who teaches you what is best for you, who directs you in the way you should go (Isaiah 48). In verse sixteen, God the Son is speaking. He identifies the Father [the Sovereign Lord] and His Spirit as having sent Him. In the next verse, the Son is clearly spoken of as the Lord

Father
Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us? Why then are we faithless to one another, profaning the covenant of our ancestors? (Malachi 2)

Son
Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity; you love righteousness and hate wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions (Psalm 45)

I have set my king on Zion, my holy hill. I will tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to me, You are my Son; today I have begotten you. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in him (Psalm 2)

The Holy Spirit
The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him - the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD - and he will delight in the fear of the LORD. He will not judge by what he sees with his eyes, or decide by what he hears with his ears (Isaiah 11)

Do you know what petros means?
Do you know that Peter's name isn't actually Peter, but the name comes from the fact that Peter is precisely the rock Christ was speaking of?

I think the point is that even though it may not say antthing that directly attests to a "catholic supremacy " , it was ultimatly the pope and his ilk that edited and compiled the bible.
So while you say you disagree with the pope but you still follow the writ of the pope by reading the samebook with the same chapters in it.

I do. You don't.

Petros: A masculine word in the Greek, a man's name.

petra: A feminine word in the Greek, a rock, or pebble.

I shall call you Petros, and upon this petra will I build my church.

Petros is literally excluded from being the petra.

Not only that, but in the bible, a thing is established by 2 or 3 witnesses, not by 1 witness mangled by popery.

The catholic bible is not the same as a Christian bible, not by a long shot. Not the same books, not the same words even in the same books, not the same at all.

Who is called the Rock in the bible 53 times?

God?

or Peter? (Whose name was Caephus in Aramaic, having been named that WAY BEFORE THIS DAY).

Oh, and since your greek sucks, Caephus in Aramaic also means rock.

And, of course, if you knew anything about Peter and his personality, "Rock" is the last thing you would call him.

Nope.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Petrine_epistles

>Most scholars today conclude that Saint Peter was not the author of the two epistles that are attributed to him and that they were written by two different authors

Is there more than just matt mark luke john letters romans revelations
Kings psalms gensis and the rest of the books.

Do they not all involve all the "teachings" of christ.

Tell me what different books are there in the bible between catholic, protestant, orthodox, anglican etc...

Try not to bring up gnostic christianity either. Becuase I could write a book in the gnostic bible.

Not at all. Petros is merely the Greek translation of the Aramaic Kepha (not Caephus, which is the Latin transliteration), which has absolutely no such connotation. It's the usual half-cocked Protty argument.

>He claims repeatedly to be the son
Yeah, the son of God, which obviously means he's not God. In general, people aren't their own sons. And as points out, angels are also called sons of God in the Bible, it's not a title unique to Jesus.

...

Protestants are just laughable. The only good criticism of Catholicism usually comes from the Orthodox.

A nice summary from Catholic Answers, shockingly:
>The entire "rock" argument is an invented canard that involves twisting a translation from a language in which the words were not spoken. Please excuse the hastiness of this reply, as it is somewhat cobbled together. There is an impressive litany of facts that relate only to Peter: Foreknowledge of him and the coming name change their first meeting (John 1:42); preaching from his boat (Luke 5:3); changing only his name (John 1:42, Matthew 16:17); Tax collectors went only to Peter to ask about the Temple tax (Matthew 17:24); Jesus paying the Temple tax only for Himself and Peter (Matthew 17:27); Jesus referred to Peter as "family" (Matthew 17:26); inviting him only to walk on the water (Matthew 14:29); giving him the keys (Matthew 16:19); even calling him Satan (Matthew 16:23); prophesying the triple denial (Luke 22:34); restoring Peter to his position (John 21:15-17); making Peter the shepherd "feed my sheep (John 21:15-17); prophesying the type of Peter's death (John 21:18); advising him to strengthen his brothers (Luke 22:32); telling only Peter "follow me" (John 21:19). The list goes on and on. Peter is mentioned 195 times in the NT - the next closest is John "the beloved disciple" at just 29 times. Peter is always listed first, and Judas last. Those who will not see this are self-blinded.
1/2

>A case can be made, strictly from scripture, that Jesus adopted Peter as son. In addition to all of the above (and additional not noted), Jesus referred to Himself as the "Sign of Jonah" (Luke 11:30). Jesus told the Pharisees that their generation would receive only the "sign of Jonah" (Matthew 16:4). A short twelve verses later, Jesus calls Peter "Simon bar (son of) Jonah" (Matthew 16:17), changes Simon's name and tells him that the Father revealed Jesus' true nature to him. The name Jonah is used in scripture only in relation to the prophet, in relation to Jesus, and as the name (literal or figurative) of Peter's father. Now, "son of Jonah" either means son of the sign of Jonah (Jesus), or son of the prophet. The total of scripture tends to point to Peter as adopted son, IMO. Additionally, Peter is also a type of prodigal son, with his denials (John 18:15, 25-27), repentance (Matthew 26:75, Luke 22:62) and restoration to the father, who came out to him and initiated a feast (John 21:4-14).
2/2

Job 25:6 “Dominion and fear are with God;
he makes peace in his high heaven. Is there any number to his armies?
Upon whom does his light not arise? How then can man be in the right before God? How can he who is born of woman be pure? Behold, even the moon is not bright, and the stars are not pure in his eyes; how much less man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm!”

Can a man born of a woman be pure? And can the son of man be a worm to God and be on par with God simultaneously?

>So the Trinity is the biblical position to hold to once one examines what Scripture teaches.

It's a Biblical position if you cling to 1% percent of the Bible and ignore the other 99%. Paul isn't a prophet, and his letters aren't God's word and the book of Mark predates the other Gospels and makes no attempts at elevating Jesus' status to that of a god.

>In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1).
>The Hebrew word for God is Elohim. Elohim is a plural noun but it is used here with a singular verb bara. Elohim speaks of the true God and is always used with a singular verb. In some sense God is both singular and plural

This is a cultural issue. In Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic people speak with a plural of respects. So you wouldn't call a king your lord, you'd call him your lords, as if he were more than one person. The king would likewise refer to himself in those sorts of terms: we have decreed, our will is, etc etc. If you read the Quran, God refers to Himself in plural terms as well.

They actually do.

And as the Greek writers used different words for the man and the foundation, it's clear that the man is not the foundation.

The bible was not written in Aramaic, or Latin.

Catholicism is all about giving the Church all the power. The priests, the popes, etc. it turned into a religious themed-dictatorship. It’s about forcing people to conform and learn their peaceful ways by force.
Protestants give the “power” back to the Bible itself. It’s much more about the messagesnof the Bible and less about who has the power to act upon the will of God.
I’m not even a religious person and I can see how fucked the catholic roots are.

Kind begets kind.

God begets God.

John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

The blind are the people who worship Peter.

>In Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic people speak with a plural of respects.
Source: your ass

This is really bad.

The sign of Jonah, that Jesus fulfilled, was to be dead in the belly of the beast for three days, and then arise from the dead.

Your "experts" don't know the bible, at all.

>Why do you dislike Christianity?
FIFY. Hmm, let’s see...
The Bible was put together by committee.
The god character therein is a bloodthirsty egotistical prick.
Thankfully, there is no evidence for a god.
MFW arguing over your particular brand

By the way, not only did Peter never claim to be the greatest apostle, or the leader of the apostles, or the pope, but actually only an "elder".

Peter got sent on missions by other apostles. Clearly not their leader.

Peter got dressed down by Paul for keeping kosher when the Judaizing Christians came into town from Jerusalem.

Clearly not the leader of Paul. In fact, Paul wrote under inspiration of the Holy Spirit that the so-called pillars of the faith, Peter James and John, added nothing to his faith.

As to the keys, Peter used them twice. To open heaven to the Jews on Pentecost, and to the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius. Heaven is now open to Jews and Gentiles, which is everyone. So the keys are used, and a) not physical and b) not transferable.

Jesus paid the tax demanded of him:

When they had come to Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter and said, “Does your Teacher not pay the temple tax?”

He said, “Yes.”

Peter, and the Teacher.

Jesus said every believer is his mother, and his brother, and his sister. Not just Peter.

Yep it's in the bloody name

>even calling him Satan (Matthew 16:23);

The same day he supposedly called Peter the foundation of the church.

Here's the foundation of the church, by the way. The real church. The church going to heaven, not the RCC:

Ephesians 2
Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Is Peter all of the apostles, and all of the prophets?

Amen. Now make the leap of faith and believe the truth.

Your kind of atheist is always so insane. God does not exist, and he is awful, and I hate him.

>muh mercenaries actually earnt their pay for once
Oh how terrible

I can’t hate something that doesn’t exist. If he did exist, he’s doing a horrible job.

Between that and stoning adulterers I sometimes think Islam is the way to go desu.

Dude, she totally wanted to fuck Harry in that scene in the bathroom in the Goblet of Fire. She was secretly kinky af. Plus no one cept' Harry ever talked to her.

I don't like the idea of a religious group claiming they need extravagant temporal power

Nigga, they literally compiled the bible

Well believe it or dont. Reality is reality.

Really that was Paul's deal. He had issues.

The church claims its proof of authority comes from the scriptures, then the church turns around and says only it has the authority to interpret the scriptures....

Was Jesus a Catholic?

Was Jesus an Anglican?

>>dislike
Meh, there are parts of it that are alright and other parts of it that are quite terrible.

>>purest form of christianity
I'm not a christian, so I have no reason to care about this.

I can understand why Catholics want to believe it. Being part of a bigger plan, wanting there to be something more after you die, having some incentive for your goodwill thorough life, and punishing those who need to be punished more or are seemingly never punished makes for a pretty happy and content person. The idea that something "more" cares for you and blesses/inflicts the events of life in an organized and premeditated fashion seems fucking great. Catholicism has all that and looks flashy while doing so.

People don't want to accept that pure happenstance and dumb luck dictates all those blessings and inflictions. Extensive planning is humanity's greatest boon, and to think that occurrences like the Mongolians getting wrecked by typhoons, fluid dynamics, or qualia which are so perfectly executed are not a part of a plan is unsettling at best. Ignorance is bliss I guess, and Catholicism does it in a very tasteful, inviting manner.

Forgive me, I am half a bottle deep in some whisky.

He a Jew

this is not what catholics believe, most catholics dont realy believe anything much, except maybe thata theres a god somewhere of somesort but they dont know what it is

catholicism is basicaly about family and tribe, accepting a order of things, and 'bearing your cross' or in other words its about accepting life as the bloody shit that it is and dregging away your years to the benefit of your respective collective

thats all

the rest is just feelgood stories to cushon the mental and emotional blow of realising life is painfull shit and then you die

this is why catholicism emphasises the suffering christ, the calvary, the christ nailed to that chunk of wood, that shit is ancient, older than christianity, its the logos crucified on the tree of the world, ever dieing ever reborn, suffering endlesly

thats what youre realy supposed to do as a catholic, clench your teeth into a grin and soldier on, sacrifice yourself as if you were sacrificing another, and sacrifice others to save your own, work, breed, fight and die, that youll all go to heaven when you die is just a sort of trick people consciously play on their emotional mind, a story you tell kids when they ask 'where did granma go?' everione knows what its about, people arent that stupid

notice that in most catholic cultures people go to war while praising the mother and son, not some higher god, that 'what' they fight and die for, thats 'who' they kill for, even unto genocide, all for mother, all for child

and its all 100% guilt free