Sanguis Christi

Peace be with you.

My main problem with the catholic faith is that it seems to have built a corrupted, worldly church based around religion. Religion in many denominations is considered a barrier to a direct relationship with God.

Peace be with you.

And unto you as well, rabonnobar. Amen.

My main problem with the catholic faith is that it seems to have built a corrupted, worldly church based around religion. Religion in many denominations is considered a barrier to a direct relationship with God.

Organized religion is the pragmatic approach to the divine but is enigmatically directed vis-à-vis through the educated stupidity of men. Mankind cohabits in an overwrought society that forces [him] to transgress the ethical and spiritual connection shared with God. Men were begun under the pristine (vision) of the Creator Almighty, but chose to defame themselves in encouraging open rebellion. It is because of our disobedience to the commandments of God the Father that humanity was made self-aware of their collective shame and frailty by-and-far. We corrupt and betrayal our own standards, although the redemption may be allotted in accepting the lordship of God Almighty.

I sought the origin of mankind's original sin, but we wrought the punishment of evil upon ourselves. God simply conducts the court of heaven in a befitting custom: he lays the law down. It was God the Father who designed humans to perfectly match his image, and it will be He who enforces the ultimate judgement toward our dissidence, Tywin Lannister. No Catholic [true to his leader] has down wrong–– (or then) he shall be not a member of the covenant with God.

I do not blind myself to the earnest behavior of men; instead I pity them. Pray for those who dare defile the sacrosanct personality of the Lord and be forgiven. Free thought or purpose is sought here.

Given the Vatican is a state, and Christ directly advocates a separation of Church and State, I believe the Catholic Church practices false doctrine and is anything but Christian. Mark 12:17

I believe it was intended as a political construct of the Roman Empires' various Emperors as a means of popular control and while its power has waned, to this day remains the embodiment of a political influence more than a moral force intent on proper practice of doctrine. There is nothing in the Gospels or apostolic letters that ordains a church construct which exceeds the base of local elders and deacons on a per congregation basis. Christ is the head of the Church, and the Pope is a false representative of Christ on Earth.

The one thing I can say that is good about the Catholic Church, is that once it lost serious political power and persecution of those that disagreed with its doctrine, it became a force of good capable of helping the poor, sick, and distressed when properly administered. Unfortunately, lately, its recent administration has been lackluster as is expected out of a religious body governed by human tradition and not divine guidance. It has done Christianity no historical good deeds in its behavior and actions, instead leaving many black marks on Christ's name and widely disputable actions in its wake including widespread acts of violence.

Christ died for one Church, one body. It happens to be the one with his name on it. Not "Catholic, Universal, Baptist, or Momon." and is mentioned repeatedly in the bibles as the Church of God.. or Churches of God in Christ in the apostolic letters in the earliest or original texts obtainable of those documents. You and many will disagree, and I respect that, but the Word is absolute on this.

I appreciate you're perhaps trying your best to understand Yaweh, but it may be best if you study the texts yourself independently of influence or bias of any other guidance than your own understanding of language. Make sure you have cross references with the original texts to ensure the accuracy of your understanding. Do not use the Latin Vulgate, its original authors used interpreted works, often from interpreters who though 'Christian' were influenced by pagan backgrounds, and not original manuscripts resulting in corruption of the message. Make sure to go to the greek/aramaic originals as far back as those documents permit.

I admit my own understanding of the Word is not perfect, but I've spent practically my entire life since awareness set in ensuring I understand the truth of these doctrines. I know with a certainty, the Catholic Church is a false construct. I firmly belief that the Church of Christ is the only one that would arise in the absence of external bias when read by an individual or group who is not externally influenced.. meaning, if a person without preconceptions read the original texts of the Bible, it is not the Catholic Church which would rise from it. Therefore, it cannot be the correct Church.

Given the Vatican is a state, and Christ directly advocates a separation of Church and State, I believe the Catholic Church practices false doctrine and is anything but Christian. Mark 12:17

It was Jesus Christ by his own hand that he invested the apostle Saint Peter to the authority of the papacy (Matthew 16:13-20). An audience may interpret the passage differently, but the same can be said for Mark 12:17. No heed need be given, Maelstrom Vortex. Christ Jesus dawns St. Peter likened to stone; the foundation of the Vatican.

I believe it was intended as a political construct of the Roman Empires' various Emperors as a means of popular control and while its power has waned, to this day remains the embodiment of a political influence more than a moral force intent on proper practice of doctrine. There is nothing in the Gospels or apostolic letters that ordains a church construct which exceeds the base of local elders and deacons on a per congregation basis. Christ is the head of the Church, and the Pope is a false representative of Christ on Earth.

No, not necessarily.The entomology of the word Catholic is roughly translated to mean "[a] universal"; ergo the lesson of the denomination. Archaic Christendom (2nd century A.D.) accounts for the primary of term in the example text Letter to the Smyrnaeans—the foundation of all denominations are arguably accredited. Hersey is marked by radical condemnation of the period.

Christianity spread per aggressive invasion; Christianity prosecuted heretics and executed them; Christianity was no different from the [otherwise] Abraham sects of the era. What is to blame? The Word spoke that you knew the absolute truth? You?

I admit my own understanding of the Word is not perfect, but I've spent practically my entire life since awareness set in ensuring I understand the truth of these doctrines. I know with a certainty, the Catholic Church is a false construct. I firmly belief that the Church of Christ is the only one that would arise in the absence of external bias when read by an individual or group who is not externally influenced.. meaning, if a person without preconceptions read the original texts of the Bible, it is not the Catholic Church which would rise from it. Therefore, it cannot be the correct Church.

Mind your tongue, Maelstrom, you write by heretical fashion. I tolerate difference of opinion, but not an attempt to disgrace my Faith. You write of an inane wisdom? I have yet to see it.

It was Jesus Christ by his own hand that he invested the apostle Saint Peter to the authority of the papacy (Matthew 16:13-20). An audience may interpret the passage differently, but the same can be said for Mark 12:17. No heed need be given, Maelstrom Vortex. Christ Jesus dawns St. Peter likened to stone; the foundation of the Vatican.

Christ is the foundation. All Christians are the stones. I understand this has been key teaching of Catholic doctrine, but this is a misrepresentation out of context of Matthew 16, the words of Christ. Matthew 16:16.. that claim.. that is the founding stone, not Peter. Christ being the Messiah was the only reason for there to be a Church. It is THE logical foundation.

Even on the off chance that Christ meant Peter, and was not referring to Christians in General or his own indirect statement of personal divinity, he never stated the powers granted to Peter would proceed down from him and there is no historical evidence that Peter passed this authority to any other person. The Catholic position is threadbare and its later institutional acts do not indicate divine inspiration.

No, not necessarily.The entomology of the word Catholic is roughly translated to mean "[a] universal"; ergo the lesson of the denomination. Archaic Christendom (2nd century A.D.) accounts for the primary of term in the example text Letter to the Smyrnaeans—the foundation of all denominations are arguably accredited. Hersey is marked by radical condemnation of the period.

Christianity spread per aggressive invasion; Christianity prosecuted heretics and executed them; Christianity was no different from the [otherwise] Abraham sects of the era. What is to blame? The Word spoke that you knew the absolute truth? You?

No, Catholicism spread per aggressive invasion. Catholics prosecuted heretics and executed them. No Christian can claim to have participated in these violent acts because the moment they are violent, they are a heretic. I never claimed to know the complete absolute truth. I am uncertain that's even possible to a human being. But I know with absolute certainty that the Catholic Church is wrong. Why do you twist my words? Truth unsettling?

Mind your tongue, Maelstrom, you write by heretical fashion. I tolerate difference of opinion, but not an attempt to disgrace my Faith. You write of an inane wisdom? I have yet to see it.

You're the one who goes against doctrine. Whose Church cannot arise without a misrepresentation of the truth. I believe you meant innate wisdom. There is innate wisdom in the Bible. A good example is in the story of the Ethiopian Ennuch, who studied the bible and sought Christ on his own without external aid. Acts 8. He only needed brief instruction by Phillip to shore up his understanding and was immediately baptized into Christ.

Below is the documentation of the verses which indicate the structure of the proper Church, nowhere does the structure go above Deacon or Elder. How do you explain this conflict with the structure of the modern day Catholic Church?

http://www.openbible.info/topics/elders_and_deacons

And to clarify. I attempt to disgrace no one, only to enlighten. The truth often offends, but it remains the truth. If the words of Christ are heresy, I write them proudly all the same.

You cannot see it because you are already indoctrinated.. and because you are already biased. You have to read the bible and abandon all you suspect to know or have been taught, the perspective of a child or a person not exposed to religious content within your life related to Christianity.

Christ is the foundation. All Christians are the stones. I understand this has been key teaching of Catholic doctrine, but this is a misrepresentation out of context of Matthew 16, the words of Christ. Matthew 16:16.. that claim.. that is the founding stone, not Peter. Christ being the Messiah was the only reason for there to be a Church. It is THE logical foundation.

No, it is a blatant misconception. I am done with these petty squabbles. I see you will not budge. Message me should you want anymore references by accredited and respected personnel, but that's it.

You imply Catholics aren't Christians? You deny that you spoke that you knew the truth in meaning of the gospel? You expect me to buy that? I wrote that you [possessed] "inane wisdom" to serve a purpose: the silly nature of your commentary is nothing more then thinly veiled lies.

I warned you once about denying the rites of my church, but you still persist against my good show of faith? I do not offer second chances unfortunately, Maelstrom. It would have been fine if you would have let-it-be, and shared common conversation around other topics in Christendom.

You are hereby banned from the blog.

Censorship will leave you the wiser, I'm certain. By the way, what title was Peter given? I didn't see the word Pope. I saw Christ declare something the rock.. but no pope and certainly didn't grant any political power. You opened us up to religious discussion, well, I'm discussing. Where is your grace and knowledge?

Linking me to anything other than Biblical verse or manuscript as citation for doctrine will not work. I do not see anything else as having authority. Anyhow, peace be upon your soul and may you find the truth. You may return to your undisputed propaganda campaign in the name of a faith you.. most likely unwittingly.. misrepresent.

Your no true vampire.

As a non-denom Christian I'm looking forward to seeing future installments of this. It'll be a nice dose of culture in the midst of the other intellectually fulfilling blogs ( ), and I'll probably learn a few things, about both secular and religious traditions by the sounds of it.

Thanks for making this Malkavian.

Hmm. Good stuff. An interesting blog post topic would be your opinion of Vatican 2 and maybe the traditionalist Catholic criticisms of it.