Not a criticism, but a genuine question: Where does the Pope get his authority? (the Bible? where does it say)
601962
The Pope is the Vicar of Christ here on earth.  His authority comes from Jesus himself.  He is one of many who have sat in the "Chair of Peter" and Peter was the first Pope, a long line of apostolic succession.  Jesus told Peter (original name Simon).."You are Peter (means rock) and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it."  It has biblical roots.  The actual scripture verse is Matthew 16: 16-19
820903
they are taking a page from the pope\nconversion by force
222949
GodShew, could you please enlighten me (and hopefully other Christians) as to what Bible you are referring to when you come up with your questions/answers/comments. Sometimes you Bless ppl in the name of God, and sometimes it almost seems as though you are cursing His Word. Although this comment may seem offensive to you, that is not what I want to accomplish. I just truly want to know, where do you stand on the TRUE Word of God?\n\nWhy do you sometimes speak in "code?" If demons are putting this in your head, you are responsible for rebuking them. Since you know SOME truths about God's Word (even though many times you twist it, as is a characteristic of Satan and his demons), you are responsible for your actions, as it is my responsibility as a Christian to tell you that.
144167
Well, it's not only the Bible, after all.  The first division was between Catholic and the first protestant, Martin Luther, creating the Lutherans, and protestantism generally.  That was not only about the Bible, but about practices of the Catholic Church which Luther protested.  Then some denominations were created to argue that the Bible should be the only source of truth for christians, some on administrative lines, like whether or not there should be bishops, and so on.  You know the Church of England's story; that was not about the Bible, but about the authority of the Pope to tell Henry he could not have a divorce.  Henry then said, in effect, OK, I'll be my own pope, and so it goes.
804964
Im in the same situation. I've got a decent knowledge of the bible and a totally impartial view of religions as a whole (I read it to see what all the hubub was about). My country is 99% Roamn Catholic, and I'd guess that at least 80% of these people couldn't quote scripture to save their lives.\nIt doesn't matter though. Real religious experience comes from participating in the Church and living your life through God. Christians will always pick and chose which parts of the Bible to follow, and who are we (filthy athiests) to argue with them. It is their book after all, they can do with it what they please.
112294
It would require some understanding as to the decision making process in the Catholic Church.  The Catholic Church is a highly varied body.  There is more internal variation inside the Catholic Church than there is across all of Protestantism.  All Protestant groups have an analog within the Church, the reverse is not true.\n\nFirst, the bible was canonized 350 years after the death of Jesus.  There wasn't a book someone could call the bible to cite as a reference.  They often did cite the scriptures, but they were not referring to the NT in the early Church.  They did also cite that which was handed on, traditio, from the apostles.  The bible is part of what was handed on, but not the whole of what was handed on.\n\nIn the early Church women were not ordained to the major orders, deacon, priest or bishop.  There were deaconesses, but their ordinations were different from the men.  Because early Christians did not do it, the Church cannot change it now.  When John Paul II was asked to rule on ordaining women, he ruled he could not change anything.  Popes and bishops may not make changes to beliefs, even if those beliefs no longer make sense.  Just because roles have changed does not change what was handed on.  Jesus was pretty radical, if he had wanted Mary Magdalene to be an Apostle, he could have made her one.  None of the Twelve, or the Seventy were women.  This may simply have been practical for some reason.  Nonetheless, what is is.\n\nUnlike Protestants who get to vote at conferences about what they believe, the rule in the Catholic Church is simple.  What did the early Christians believe and do?  That guides everything else.
1087803
Christians don't have a pope, catholics do.  Please get it straight.\n\nThis I believe;  http://homelessheart.com/testimony.htm
1017368
I'm a Christian so I'll only answer the first 2 questions. \nYou are absolutely right about the pope and his riches. I think he'll have a lot of explaining to do when he's standing before God one day......\nAs for the second question, those are both excerpts from the law God gave to the Israelites. According to Acts 15, Gentile believers are not required to keep the mosaic law. \nHomosexuality however is mentioned also in the New Testament and is referred to as sexual immorality.
918941
In Protestant (liberal) theology there are several "middle grounds."  There is the notion that the Bible "contains God's word" and also that is can "become God's words."  These are of course nuanced meanings of how Scripture communicates God's message through a supposedly imperfect text.
948217
Firstly I think your question is slightly misleading, "most people" do not believe in the Bible let alone take it as literal. Within the Christan community I think that the basic tenants of Christianity are regarded as enough i.e do unto others as would be done to you, it is a small but vocal and powerful minority that are fanatical  (the same is true of Islam and there is interesting parells). There is also quite a difference between the European (where I live) views and some of the more evangelistic US versions. I think the fanatics that preach literal interpretations (although missing out all the bits they don't agree with) do so as a means of social control, to gain political power  and make money. But I also think that peole like this, Father K above makes a very valid point; when the Church of Rome was supreme people where able to follow i's rules and doctroines without question. When the reforamation came along and removed that, humanity lost some of its certainty in life, we as a society became lost; there was no objective truth in the world anymore. we have been trying to get back to that certainity ever since, with some of the more fundamental christains this had been be adpoting The Bible as a literal infaliable truth (Father K's "Paper Pope". there is a famous painting of Martin Luther overlooking a church and crying out "My God what have I done", a question Protestants have struggled with, to replace the security of the Papacy they have put their faith in The Bible
208781
On occasion, you will encounter one of our separated brethren who will criticize Catholics because we call our priests "father", citing the verse above "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your father, who is in heaven." (Mt 23:9 KJV) If one takes this passage literally, this might seem to be a fair criticism.\n\nWhat does this individual call their male parent? Daddy? Papa (which, incidentally, is Italian for Pope)? When they fill out a credit application, what do they put in the block which asks for their father's name - God? Obviously, there is meaning of this scriptural passage other than the literal one. This meaning is that there is only one Creator, from whom all "fatherhood" comes (Eph 3:14-15). This does not preclude addressing someone as "father", so long as you understand that all fatherhood (both biological and spiritual) originates with God the Father. We are all member's of God's family, a fact we acknowledge every time we recite the 'Our Father' or the Creed.\n\nSt. Paul calls himself a "father" in 1 Thessalonians 2:11 "As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one you, as a father does his children." (KJV) and again in 1 Corinthians 4:15 "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel." (KJV). In both of these passages, St. Paul considers himself a spiritual father just as the priest is today. This same interpretation is presented by St. John in 1 Jn 2:13-14 where he says twice "I write unto you, fathers because ye have known him that is from the beginning." (KJV).\n\nFinally, you might ask this individual if he or she is familiar with the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible (a common modern Protestant translation). If so, refer him or her to Matthew 23:10, the passage immediately after the one quoted to you: "Nor are you to be called 'teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Messiah". Even they have Sunday School teachers.
913416
No he does not, that is why when one of his disciples was walking along the road and someone was reading Scripture and the Lord told him to hurry to catch up with the guy and the Apostle asked the guy what he was reading and the guy told him but, asked the explanation of it the Apostle then explained it. This is to show us that we need his church to interpret it correctly. I mean look at all the varying interpretations here on this site
603097
The pope doesn't have the power to grant 1 wish, let alone 3. Interesting that you compared him to a genie - same amount of power, although the pope isn't fiction.
1021867
I looked for the statement by Cardinal Castrillon but couldn't find it. So I can't state an opinion.\n\nPlease add a link next time. \n\nThank you.
461048
Hmm, good question.\n\nI seem to recall a passage in the Bible about Jesus throwing moneychangers and salesmen out of the temple... apparently their presence in the house of God offended His son.\n\nThere does seem to be a conflict of interest present between the Catholic Church (RCC) and God's Word.  Then again, the RCC's leader, the pope, said that the Bible was something that the average person shouldn't worry too much about, and to just accept whatever the RCC said instead.  \n\nYeah.
757908
Catholics believe that Jesus comisioned St Peter as the first leader of the Church. Matthew's gopel has the most direct biblical indication of the papacy: And I tell you, you are Peter (literally meaning rock) and on this rock i will build my church.... I will give you thekeys of the kingdom of heaven. (Mt 16:18-19)  based on the statement of Jesus Himself, peter is clearly portrayed in the New Testament as the leader of the disciples. a pope can make infalliable, dinging pronouncements under certian conditions. infalliability doesn't mean that absolutely everything a pope says is free from error. all Christians believe that God protected Holy Scriptures from error by means of inspiration, even though sinful falliable men wrote it.  we catholics also believe that God the Holy Spirit protects His Church (Jn 14:16) even though sinful, imprefect men are involved in it.\n\nthe pope is like the head of the organization.  in the episcopal they they their archbishop (i think that's his title) in othes it's the president of the association. even the first baptist churches, church of God in Christ, methodist, protestant, etc all have a leader at the helm trying to lead the entire masses. this person is to spend their life in prayer and learning trying to help thoseof us who, while we can think and pray for ourselves, often need study groups or other places to asnwer questions.  without a leader/guide, to whom would questions be asked - each other is surely one asnwer but do we all have time to dedicate 24/7 to prayer and learning.  while i wish it was so, it is not.\n\nGod bless!
890129
The Book of Tobit is a terrific story ... and it's still part of the original Canon of scripture, courtesy of Jesus' universal, full gospel church.\n\nThat's the Catholic Church ... the church with authority given to it by God to make those types of decisions.\n\nI wonder, what authority did the reformers have, and where did it come from, when they chose to remove the Book of Tobit, as well as the other "apocryphal" books from the Bible, especially since the matter had been settled for over a thousand years?