Spaz

Yeah, I know that catholicism is far older than protestantism, I was just wondering what catholic practices came from scripture and what didn't, and I've learned some stuff about catholicism in this thread. Now Magus and Rad and Amos and whoever can fight over who better interprets their common imaginary friend.

never been there

Of course there's more statues of Mary. She's a perfectly sympathetic character, as opposed to Paul. Only the most unhinged Protestants actually like Paul.

Magus55

Ok Spaz, in summary - almost anything that comes to mind when you think of practices and doctrines that Catholics follow aren't scriptural and are from the brainwashing interpretations of the Vatican

Biff the unclean

But the only reason you think that everything has to come from scripture and that tradition is meaningless is because that is a Protestant change from the RC standard. You can't make changes and then pretend that they are the original way of doing things. The question isn't why don't Catholics follow only scripture, the question is why have Prods cut themselves off from rich tradition for no reason.

Yellum Notnef

There would be no Christianity at all right now if it were'nt for Catholic brainwashing on a global scale. Centuries of this brainwashing caused everyone to believe the bible without question. And it worked so well that the Protestants tried to save the bible from the very monster who brainwashed them all into believing it was real.:banghead:

Amos

The problem is that the Jesus you read about was not God and therefore was crucified. This crucifixion entailed the censorship of his senses to annihilate the desires of the flesh and after this he was raised as an attribute of Christ. Christ was John from the netherworld, hence: "mother, there is your son," and Jesus was from the conscious world now added to the netherworld. In other words, Jesus was the omega now added to the alpha (Christ), or, the end (Jesus) added to the beginning (Christ). Or, the left brain added to the right brain, or, the lesser serpent (eve) was raised into the tree of Life (Mary) and therefore the catfight is over (equals: peace on earth). Yes, that is Catholic theology but exclusive to Catholics.

Jobar

[Aside to Demigawd] I think my money's on Amos. He does, after all, have the power to cloud men's minds.

Uh... but how are we to decide who wins?

Aren't they all losers anyway? [/aside]

Radorth

I'm afraid it's because:

"For the sake of your tradition, you make the Word of God void."

I'm not simply ignoring tradition, for there is usually some grain of truth to it. I have already said I found purgatory to have a scriptural basis, although it is a fairly early doctrine.

However, is it a great surprise to anyone that if you research later writings about Buddha or Muhammed or Wyatt Earp, you find all sorts of things added? That Buddha was born of a virgin and worked miracles when he himself denied it? That in the Haddith, Muhammed does and says all kinds of things those with him failed to note? You find more and more fantastic stories added? Do any skeptics disagree with Sneddin's insight that so many Catholic "miracles" have a magical quality compared to the Biblical ones? ("Parlor tricks" was the phrase I believe he used.) Is it a surprise that any organization is doomed to be overrun by bureaucrats who have no collective conscience or accountabliity and no rational reference point?

Many other skeptics have seen great differences. The founders had some rather choice nicknames for that "rich tradition" as well. But like all practical geniuses, they invariably kept the carrots and spit out the sticks in matters of faith as well as politics.

Sorry Amos, Catholicism hasn't been "the envy of the world" for 500 years at least, in spite it's worldly wealth and gold leafed authority. I suggest the Jesus and Peter of the NT wouldn't be caught dead in the Vatican, let alone the Pope's awful garb. I bet some Popes wondered about that themselves on hot days, but were afraid to ask.

Rad

Radorth

You have a point. Who wants to see a statue of a guy who disdained "voluntary humiliation," thought priests could marry, and demanded people not bow to him. By the seventh century, he must have been considered completely irrelevant.

Rad

Biff the unclean

You forget that Jesus has only been Mr Nice Guy Kissy Face since the later1700's before then he was sending you to fire and brimstone. The church of love would happily burn you at the stake for all the middle ages. You needed Mary to save you from her son and his doctrine of HELL. Jesus evolved over the years to reflect the Humanism movement of the Age of Reason.

And as for Catholic tradition and the Pope they had Matt 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

In other words their religion wasn't static, it could grow and change. God was happy to change with it. Obviously the Prods changed too since the 2003 model of Jesus bears so little resemblance to the 1703 version. But they like to pretend that their faith is petrified (maybe that's the rock mentioned in Matt 16:18. Fossilized philosophy )