|
Outer Haven
|
 |
« on: July 12, 2012, 11:13:17 AM » |
|
Look what I've found... hmm... http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/luther_denominations.pdf(Marked bold by me.) --- HOW OLD IS YOUR CHURCH? If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk of the Catholic Church, in approximately 1520. If you belong to the Church of England, your religion was founded by King Henry VIII (an ex-Catholic) in the year 1534. Henry VIII decided to create his own church when Pope Clement VII would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry. If you are a Mennonite, Menno Simons (an ex-Catholic) created your religion in 1536. If you are a Presbyterian, John Knox (an ex-Catholic) founded your sect in Scotland in the year 1560. If you are a Congregationalist, your religion began with Robert Brown in Holland in 1582. If you are a Baptist, John Smyth created your sect in Amsterdam in 1605. If you are of the Dutch Reformed church, your church began with Michaelis Jones in New York in 1628. If you are a Quaker, your religion began with George Fox in 1652. If you are a Protestant Episcopalian, Samuel Seabury created your sect in the American colonies in the 17th century, as an offshoot of the Church of England. If you are Amish, Jacob Amman created your religion in 1693, as an offshoot of the Mennonites. If you are a Methodist, your religion was launched by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744. If you are a Unitarian, Theophilus Lindley founded your sect in London in 1774. If you are a Mormon (“Latter Day Saints”), your religion comes from Joseph Smith, who revealed it in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1829. If you are a Seventh Day Adventist, your religion was created by Ellen White in 1860. If you worship with the Salvation Army, William Booth started your sect in London in 1865. If you are of the “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” your beliefs came from Charles Taze Russell in 1872. If you are a “Christian Scientist,” Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy devised your religion in 1879. If you belong to one of the religious organizations known as “Church of the Nazarene," "Pentecostal Gospel," "Holiness Church," "Pilgrim Holiness Church," “Assemblies of God,” “United Church of Christ,” etc., your religion is one of the thousands of new sects founded by men in the last century. If you are Catholic, you know that your religion was founded in the year 33 by Jesus Christ,
the Son of God, true God and true man; and that this one Church, to which people must
belong to be saved, will exist until the end of time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"This is the liberty we've won for ourselves -- Outer Haven!"
|
|
|
|
Dok
|
|
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2012, 11:25:58 AM » |
|
The Catholic church was founded by Constatine around 300 ad.  Jesus established his true church, to which the catholic church has tried to wipe out, over and over again. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
EvadingGrid
Toxophillite
Global Moderator
Member
 Offline
Posts: 10,702
Rat Catcher
|
|
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2012, 11:28:25 AM » |
|
The Catholic church was founded by Constatine around 300 ad. Jesus established his true church, to which the catholic church has tried to wipe out, over and over again. After 1611 in your case. A slight gap . . . But then again Gap Theory has never been a problem for you. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dok
|
|
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2012, 11:35:20 AM » |
|
its always good to see the popes boys come out with their lies. to bad for you the the Bible goes al the way back to Antioch, and not Alexandria like the popes book of lies. have fun at the coven meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2012, 12:53:33 PM » |
|
oh this again? Jesus gave Peter keys to heaven  here we go... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
Kilika
|
|
« Reply #5 on: July 12, 2012, 02:37:56 PM » |
|
If you are Catholic, you know that your religion was founded in the year 33 by Jesus Christ,
Stone-cold lie. The RCC didn't come around till, like Dok said, around I'd say 250-300ad, and by 400 were in full swing running around stealing other religions relics, murdering any who resisted, and posting up fake relics for the unfatihful to worship in place of Jesus. The evil running the Catholic church has been around ever since the garden. Notice how the serpent tried to make Eve something she wasn't, and is doing the same thing with Mary in the RCC. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)
|
|
|
|
Jacob Law
|
|
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2012, 02:46:33 AM » |
|
Around 6000 years old
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What do you under-stand?
|
|
|
EvadingGrid
Toxophillite
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Posts: 10,702
Rat Catcher
|
|
« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2012, 04:27:16 AM » |
|
A church based on Bible Believers, seeking all its authority from text...
Well it has a few additional implied requirements.
( a ) Access by the population to PRINTED copies of the Bible in 'English'/'Dutch'/'French' et cetera ...
( b ) A literate population that can read these copies of the Bible.
You can not claim to exist prior to invention of the Printing Press and the Translation of The Bible into the populations native languages.
Well, actually that is not true, you only have to read the posts above. But considering the amount of time and effort you have spent accusing catholics of simply just 'making things up', it is so sad it is not funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dok
|
|
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2012, 08:55:46 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jacob Law
|
|
« Reply #9 on: July 14, 2012, 09:47:01 AM » |
|
A church based on Bible Believers, seeking all its authority from text...
Well it has a few additional implied requirements.
( a ) Access by the population to PRINTED copies of the Bible in 'English'/'Dutch'/'French' et cetera ...
( b ) A literate population that can read these copies of the Bible.
You can not claim to exist prior to invention of the Printing Press and the Translation of The Bible into the populations native languages.
Well, actually that is not true, you only have to read the posts above. But considering the amount of time and effort you have spent accusing catholics of simply just 'making things up', it is so sad it is not funny.
Yea, those idoits back before the flood certainly couldn't figure out how to read and write! Yea, Yea 2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, 2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; Wonder what church Noah the preacher was from? Yea Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us: 1 Corinthians 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Colossians 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church: Hebrews 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. Hebrews 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What do you under-stand?
|
|
|
|
compguygene
|
|
« Reply #10 on: July 14, 2012, 10:34:59 AM » |
|
Lutherans were NOT founded by Martin Luther, but founded much later. I could go on and on about the historical inaccuracies of the original post here. Of course, the only true body of Christ, what we could call followers of "The Way" (that is what it is called in a few places in the New Testament) have always been a minority remnant of true believers in saving power of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, as stated by many in this thread.
The cool thing is, said true believers can be found in churches of any type and not even attending a church. He knows his sheep and his sheep know his voice.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. -John Adams
|
|
|
|
decemberfellow
|
|
« Reply #11 on: July 14, 2012, 10:39:53 AM » |
|
The cool thing is, said true believers can be found in churches of any type and not even attending a church. He knows his sheep and his sheep know his voice. [/b] by compguygene +1000 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mark12:
4And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2012, 03:29:36 PM » |
|
Look what I've found... hmm... http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/luther_denominations.pdf(Marked bold by me.) --- HOW OLD IS YOUR CHURCH? If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk of the Catholic Church, in approximately 1520. If you belong to the Church of England, your religion was founded by King Henry VIII (an ex-Catholic) in the year 1534. Henry VIII decided to create his own church when Pope Clement VII would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry. If you are a Mennonite, Menno Simons (an ex-Catholic) created your religion in 1536. If you are a Presbyterian, John Knox (an ex-Catholic) founded your sect in Scotland in the year 1560. If you are a Congregationalist, your religion began with Robert Brown in Holland in 1582. If you are a Baptist, John Smyth created your sect in Amsterdam in 1605. If you are of the Dutch Reformed church, your church began with Michaelis Jones in New York in 1628. If you are a Quaker, your religion began with George Fox in 1652. If you are a Protestant Episcopalian, Samuel Seabury created your sect in the American colonies in the 17th century, as an offshoot of the Church of England. If you are Amish, Jacob Amman created your religion in 1693, as an offshoot of the Mennonites. If you are a Methodist, your religion was launched by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744. If you are a Unitarian, Theophilus Lindley founded your sect in London in 1774. If you are a Mormon (“Latter Day Saints”), your religion comes from Joseph Smith, who revealed it in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1829. If you are a Seventh Day Adventist, your religion was created by Ellen White in 1860. If you worship with the Salvation Army, William Booth started your sect in London in 1865. If you are of the “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” your beliefs came from Charles Taze Russell in 1872. If you are a “Christian Scientist,” Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy devised your religion in 1879. If you belong to one of the religious organizations known as “Church of the Nazarene," "Pentecostal Gospel," "Holiness Church," "Pilgrim Holiness Church," “Assemblies of God,” “United Church of Christ,” etc., your religion is one of the thousands of new sects founded by men in the last century. If you are Catholic, you know that your religion was founded in the year 33 by Jesus Christ,
the Son of God, true God and true man; and that this one Church, to which people must
belong to be saved, will exist until the end of time.well done outerhaven, there are many threads here started by me that shows the bible proves the teachings of the Catholic Church, don't let the 6 or 7 zealots who don't believe the bible persuade you otherwise |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Shorty123
|
|
« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2012, 03:55:01 PM » |
|
The Catholic church was founded by Constatine around 300 ad. Jesus established his true church, to which the catholic church has tried to wipe out, over and over again. Yep...Pretty much. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I am nothing without Him. For He is my Savior and my light. He brings me to a land of promise and flourishes my generations. He keeps me from harm and wakes my sleeping eyes. www.awtj.org |
|
|
|
compguygene
|
|
« Reply #14 on: July 14, 2012, 03:55:40 PM » |
|
I find it both amusing and annoying how the Catholics, Baptists, etc., etc. around here seem to have such a need to prove they are right that they must prove the other wrong. It is way to easy to point fingers. ENOUGH OF THAT! Let's talk in terms of inclusion. If, as followers of the teachings of Jesus Christ of Nazareth we agree that only by faith in his blood shed at the cross of Calvary, and having raised up after the third day from the dead, and that salvation is from that redemptive work of our redeemer, then we share the core belief that the work of the Christ demands of us. We can debate the details, but this ought to be done in love. If I really wanted to, I could pick out every one of the denominations of Christians out there and tear apart things to say what is wrong with them. To what end?
Am I to be so proud that I must prove that I alone am right and everyone else is wrong?
Am I so devoid of love that I am just tinkling brass?
I would love for all of you to take just 5 minutes of your day and reflect on this. I am not saying we should all be one belief, one world religion. I am saying that as a community of what I hope are true patriots, we need to find more common ground and just love one another.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. -John Adams
|
|
|
|
decemberfellow
|
|
« Reply #15 on: July 14, 2012, 04:41:35 PM » |
|
If you are Catholic, you know that your religion was founded in the year 33 by Jesus Christ,
the Son of God, true God and true man; and that this one Church, to which people must belong to be saved, will exist until the end of time So the catholic church is it huh the ticket to heaven.(red above) sorry brother Jesus Christ is my savior not any religion nor building John 3:16 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mark12:
4And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #16 on: July 14, 2012, 05:44:49 PM » |
|
A church based on Bible Believers, seeking all its authority from text...
Well it has a few additional implied requirements.
( a ) Access by the population to PRINTED copies of the Bible in 'English'/'Dutch'/'French' et cetera ...
( b ) A literate population that can read these copies of the Bible.
You can not claim to exist prior to invention of the Printing Press and the Translation of The Bible into the populations native languages.
Well, actually that is not true, you only have to read the posts above. But considering the amount of time and effort you have spent accusing catholics of simply just 'making things up', it is so sad it is not funny.
9/11 truth was out there before the film "Loose Change" "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Back in the day people spread the word |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
egypt
|
|
« Reply #17 on: July 14, 2012, 05:50:36 PM » |
|
The Catholic church was founded by Constatine around 300 ad. Jesus established his true church, to which the catholic church has tried to wipe out, over and over again. Totally true. And then, if you did not accept your new religion provided by NWO, morphed into the Catholic Church, you were tortured and killed. In particular, they were purging women at that time. Probably some sort of population control. Women and families, children always seem to be hated for some reason. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #18 on: July 14, 2012, 05:56:14 PM » |
|
I find it both amusing and annoying how the Catholics, Baptists, etc., etc. around here seem to have such a need to prove they are right that they must prove the other wrong. It is way to easy to point fingers. ENOUGH OF THAT! Let's talk in terms of inclusion. If, as followers of the teachings of Jesus Christ of Nazareth we agree that only by faith in his blood shed at the cross of Calvary, and having raised up after the third day from the dead, and that salvation is from that redemptive work of our redeemer, then we share the core belief that the work of the Christ demands of us. We can debate the details, but this ought to be done in love. If I really wanted to, I could pick out every one of the denominations of Christians out there and tear apart things to say what is wrong with them. To what end?
"Galatians 1:8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." stressed enough? please do tear into the denominations
Am I to be so proud that I must prove that I alone am right and everyone else is wrong?
"Proverbs 12:1Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish." We're all here seeking answers no?
Am I so devoid of love that I am just tinkling brass?
I would love for all of you to take just 5 minutes of your day and reflect on this. I am not saying we should all be one belief, one world religion. I am saying that as a community of what I hope are true patriots, we need to find more common ground and just love one another.
posted with love
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #19 on: July 14, 2012, 06:06:16 PM » |
|
What About People Who Never Hear the Gospel? http://youtu.be/T09dAdN5ApQ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
egypt
|
|
« Reply #20 on: July 14, 2012, 06:28:37 PM » |
|
I was not taught and knew practically nothing about Christianity when I was saved through an experience with Christ Jesus. Part of the experience was the knowledge given that everyone will have the opportunity sometime. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jacob Law
|
|
« Reply #21 on: July 14, 2012, 06:35:55 PM » |
|
What happens if you truly will seek the truth you will find it, no excuses. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What do you under-stand?
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2012, 08:16:02 PM » |
|
So the catholic church is it huh the ticket to heaven.(red above) sorry brother
Jesus Christ is my savior not any religion nor building John 3:16
Then you better pay attention to what He said Matthew 16:17-18-“And I say to thee: That thou are Peter: and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 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.” |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2012, 07:19:45 AM » |
|
Then you better pay attention to what He said
Matthew 16:17-18-“And I say to thee: That thou are Peter: and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 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.”
"14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
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. 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. 20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. 21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day." How many times will you quote that out of context? your argument only works for those who don't read the whole text is about the unveiling of his Jesus's identity How was Constantine part of apostolic succession? you will not answer that |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2012, 09:25:28 AM » |
|
"14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
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.
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.
20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day."
How many times will you quote that out of context?
your argument only works for those who don't read the whole text is about the unveiling of his Jesus's identity
How was Constantine part of apostolic succession? you will not answer that
the quote is taken out of context? because you say so? how is it out of context from the following passages you quoted...., I doubt there's any point in discussing these matters with you and your cronies since you make fun of the "keys" given to St Peter, you make fun of the "Eucharist" caliing it cookie god's ...I explained it all in the other threads but you just won't accept the bible , what's laughable is you think you are going to heaven...but for others who are interested in the truth .. Constantine he did not start the Catholic Church Distorting the facts of the early Church is a way of life for many Protestants. To cite just a few facts: all the ancient sources place St. Peter’s martyrdom in Rome; St. Ignatius wrote of the Catholic Church more than a century before Constantine; and St. Irenaeus (well before Constantine) identified the Church as having its primary authority in Rome, as a result of the special succession. In his Letter to the Smryneans, 8, 2, dated approximately 107 A.D., St. Ignatius writes: “Wherever the bishop appears let the congregation be present; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3, Chap. 3, Approx. 180: “Since, however, it would be very tedious in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who… assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing] out the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church [i.e. of Rome], on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere... ” St. Ignatius also wrote about the Church of Rome’s primacy and its link with St. Peter. Obviously many other facts could be mentioned. Our audios on the early Papacy (in our “Refuting Protestantism” section) are relevant to this issue. Link: http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/papacy_mainpage.php Tertullian, Demurrer Against the Heretics, 36, 1, 200 A.D.: “If you come across into Asia, you have Ephesus. But if you are near to Italy, you have Rome, whence also our authority derives. How happy is that Church, on which the Apostles poured out their whole doctrine along with their blood, where Peter endured a passion like that of the Lord…” |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
decemberfellow
|
|
« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2012, 10:38:30 AM » |
|
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.
The rock is Jesus Christ! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Mark12:
4And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
5But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2012, 02:17:50 PM » |
|
The rock is Jesus Christ!
please read the thread Was Peter first pope debate to get a better understanding “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (1 Cor. 3:11) Those who raise this objection fail to realize that the bible speaks of all the Apostles as foundations Revelation 21:14 “And the wall of the city had twelve foundations,and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” Is there a contradiction between Rev 21:14 and 1 Cor 3:11? No ofcourse not. The fact that Christ is the only foundation as 1 Cor 3:11 teaches simply means that everything comes from Christ. All true authority in the Church must come from Christ because the Church itself comes from Christ. Anything outside of Christ is a false foundation. "Peter’s authority comes precisely from Jesus Christ, as matthew 16 shows. It’s quite obvious,therefore that if Jesus is the one who established these things in Peter, then what’s set up in peter is not a foundation other than of Christ. It’s the very foundation of Christ." So the fact that Christ is the foundation or the cornerstone,as we read in Ephesians 2:20,does not mean that Christ Himself could not or did not establish one apostle to have a perpetual office which would be the rock upon which the Church would be built. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. For example: Jesus is the Good Shepherd ( John 10:14), but He also gives the responsibility of shepherding all His sheep to Peter, as we will see in John 21:15-17. Jesus is the one with the keys (Rev. 1:18,Rev3:7),but He gives His keys to Peter |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2012, 02:24:18 PM » |
|
DAVIDE MTL those threads I read them you got owned very entertaining thanks |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
compguygene
|
|
« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2012, 12:21:18 AM » |
|
Goforward, I really do appreciate a decent answer to the questions that I posed. Of course, your reply demands an answer on my part. So, after watching so many threads where David MTL gets taken apart by scripture, I thought I would toss this bit of history in the mix about Papal Infallibility. Original and complete source to be found at http://churchvstate.org/Catholic/papalinfallibility.html When the First Vatican Council defined papal infallibility, it claimed it was the ancient and constant faith of the Church. In fact, the first statement on personal infallibility came from Pope Leo the Great in 457: 'By the power of the Holy Spirit he needs no human instruction and is incapable of doctrinal error.' It is clear and precise. But there's a snag. Leo was referring not to himself but to the new Roman Emperor. In Origins of Papal Infallibility 1150-1350, Brian Tierney showed that the doctrine of papal infallibility was invented by enemies of the papacy between 1280 and 1320 in an attempt to limit the power of the reigning pontiff. The more rebellious they became, the more they exaggerated the infallibility of past popes. No pontiff ever claimed that he personally could propound dogmas, that is, irreformable doctrines to be held by all Catholics. Popes were chiefly interested in their supremacy. Integral to this was ultimate authority in doctrine and discipline. Why didn't they want infallibility as well? Partly because history showed beyond question that many popes had been heretics and apostates. There was also a more important political reason: it would limit their personal power. How? If they were infallible, so were their predecessors. If a predecessor had spoken infallibly they would be bound by what he said. Popes held that only Christ could not err. This meant that they were only bound by scripture and definitions of Councils which interpreted scripture. Incidentally, to suggest that the pope was above General Councils makes nonsense of the whole history of the early and medieval Church. The pope had no choice but to accept the doctrinal decisions of the early Councils, especially the first four, for a Council is greater than a pope. Popes could err; Councils could not. When Pope John XXII (1316-34) heard that some upstart Franciscans had proposed papal infallibility, he was furious. They were accusing him of being a heretic for denying his own infallibility when no pope had ever claimed it. What John XXII's foes were implying was he had contradicted his infallible predecessors, therefore, he should be removed from office and handed over to his own Inquisition to be burnt. In his Bull, Quia quorundam of 1324, John XXII quoted those who said, 'What the Roman Pontiffs have once defined in faith and morals stands so immutably that it is not permitted to a successor to revoke it.' This was a lie, he said, and inspired by the 'Father of lies'. He was not infallible. He, the Pope, retained the right, in principle, to be a heretic, like anyone else, but he didn't intend to exercise this right by espousing the new heresy of papal infallibility. The first pope to hear of papal infallibility called it insane, the teaching of the devil. Like all medieval popes, John XXII saw that papal infallibility would make him not the equal of his predecessors but their inferior, for he would only be able to teach some things with their consent. This violated a basic legal principle that an equal cannot bind an equal. Papal absolutism demanded that a pope be answerable to God and no one else. Far from his predecessors being necessarily free from error, every pope had a duty to say that popes had erred but their heresies had been corrected by Councils and popes after them. (p. 163) Not until the 16th century did popes see the positive side of infallibility. At one point, Innocent XI (1676-89) thought of infallibly defining his own infallibility. The "devil's teaching" was on the way to becoming Catholic doctrine. With good reason. If a pope wasn't infallible and a Council was, a Council was superior to the pope. Dissidents could appeal over the pope's head to a Council. Such a right of appeal was reasonable for as long as the papacy kept to the Catholic teaching that popes can err while Councils cannot. This is why the papacy in the end rejected traditional doctrine in favour of what John XXII called pernicious novelty. They chose to be above Councils even if the price was making themselves subject to the teaching of their predecessors. That was annoying, all right. Each pontiff would always have to be looking over his shoulder at the ever-lengthening line of pontiffs behind him to make sure he didn't contradict them. Even so, being subject to dead popes, having dried-mouthed conversations with skeletons, was less threatening than being subject to future Councils. After Pius IX insisted on having himself declared infallible in 1870, Cardinal Newman wrote: 'We have come to a climax of tyranny. It is not good for a pope to live twenty years. He becomes a god, has no one to contradict him, does not know facts and does cruel things without meaning it.' Many people don't realize how novel the idea of infallible popes is. It was only proclaimed at the instigation of Pope Pius IX at the First Vatican Council in 1870, about whom his private secretary, Monsignor Talbot said: 'Theology was not Pius' forte.' and 'As the Pope is no great theologian, I feel convinced that when he writes, his encyclicals are inspired by God.' Complete ignorance was no bar to infallibility, he said, since God can point out the right road even by the mouth of a talking ass.' (regarding which De Rosa comments  'Talbot, without meaning it, had reached the heights of Voltaire.' " (p. 133) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other. -John Adams
|
|
|
EvadingGrid
Toxophillite
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Posts: 10,702
Rat Catcher
|
|
« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2012, 02:15:18 AM » |
|
I fail to see why a group centered on the core idea that all authority comes from the Bible and not the Pope, can not admit that it took the invention of the printing press and the translation into native tongues for this to be possible. Prior to that, books got written in Latin, Greek and so on... they also needed to be copied by hand in scriptoriums and the expense was beyond the means of the bulk of the population.
I fail to see why it is not possible to not only admit this, but to be proud of being part of a new era leaving behind the dark ages and the middle ages.
The modern Christian has free access to all the texts, notes, translation details, maps and all other relevant details. This has been possible only with the invention of the printing press, its development, and an explosion in literacy.
Why deny this ?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Kilika
|
|
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2012, 03:56:08 AM » |
|
That may be too much of a generalization. Not all are of that position. Not sure what they are denying, but to me it is obvious what role such devices has played in history. And with the new all social network digital society and smart phones (which are actually mini pc's that have a phone built-in), people can see things streaming live, right on their cell phones. Today's smart phones are yesterday's printing presses.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2012, 07:14:43 PM » |
|
Goforward, I really do appreciate a decent answer to the questions that I posed. Of course, your reply demands an answer on my part. So, after watching so many threads where David MTL gets taken apart by scripture, I thought I would toss this bit of history in the mix about Papal Infallibility. Original and complete source to be found at http://churchvstate.org/Catholic/papalinfallibility.htmlYou are either confused or don't understand english.. if you disagree with my positions you are clearly against scripture. Instead of writing about papal infallibility why don't you to try and disprove just one of my points below, your buddy goforward and his cronies have failed miserably. The truth is the debates are not really close, the Bible clearly has "taken apart" their man made teachings. The score is 10 -0 for the bible and Catholic teachings vs the born ye againers. 1. the Bible repeatedly teaches that man is not justified by faith alone, but that human deeds (sins), in addition to faith, determine whether a man has justification and salvation 2.the Bible repeatedly teaches that a true believer can fall away from the faith or lose his justification through sin; and that many passages refute the popular idea of “eternal security” or “once saved always saved” 3.the Bible teaches that Jesus instituted confession to priests, and gave the Apostles the power to forgive sins 4.-the Bible teaches that saintly men intercede with God (both on Earth and after death), and that their intercession can impact how God will deal with other men 5.-the Bible teaches that the statues/images of heavenly figures are not forbidden, but were actually commanded for God’s temple; and that the relics of saintly men were venerated and even miraculous 6.the Bible teaches that water baptism takes away sins, justifies, and is necessary for salvation 7.the Bible teaches that, in addition to Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Church must also be believed; and that Sacred Tradition is also “the word of God” – refuting sola scriptura 8.the fathers of the Church (i.e., those earliest Christian writers who received the tradition of the Apostles) believed in Catholic teaching 9.the Bible without any doubt teaches that the body and blood of Jesus are present in the true Eucharist, as the Catholic Church has always taught 10.the Bible teaches that Jesus made St. Peter the first pope, the prime minister or governor of His Church |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2012, 07:20:16 PM » |
|
I fail to see why a group centered on the core idea that all authority comes from the Bible and not the Pope, can not admit that it took the invention of the printing press and the translation into native tongues for this to be possible. Prior to that, books got written in Latin, Greek and so on... they also needed to be copied by hand in scriptoriums and the expense was beyond the means of the bulk of the population.
I fail to see why it is not possible to not only admit this, but to be proud of being part of a new era leaving behind the dark ages and the middle ages.
The modern Christian has free access to all the texts, notes, translation details, maps and all other relevant details. This has been possible only with the invention of the printing press, its development, and an explosion in literacy.
Why deny this ?
Because they are not logical and can't admit they have been decieved by man made religions. Prior to the invention of the printing press in the 15th century, it was a laborious and painstaking task to reproduce the Bible. It had to be done by hand. This difficulty combined with common illiteracy, meant that few had a bible for the first 15 centuries of the Church. Would God have left His Church without the means to mass-produce the sole rule of faith for the first 1500 years of the Church’s existence? Obviously not. The notion is ridiculous and self-refuting. In the first millennium, the rule of faith for the Christians was the Church. It remains so today. The Church is the proximate rule of faith, which provides the true understanding of scripture and tradition, which are the dual sources of Jesus Christ’s revelation. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
EvadingGrid
Toxophillite
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Posts: 10,702
Rat Catcher
|
|
« Reply #33 on: July 17, 2012, 08:12:40 AM » |
|
Because they are not logical and can't admit they have been decieved by man made religions.
Prior to the invention of the printing press in the 15th century, it was a laborious and painstaking task to reproduce the Bible. It had to be done by hand. This difficulty combined with common illiteracy, meant that few had a bible for the first 15 centuries of the Church. Would God have left His Church without the means to mass-produce the sole rule of faith for the first 1500 years of the Church’s existence? Obviously not. The notion is ridiculous and self-refuting. In the first millennium, the rule of faith for the Christians was the Church. It remains so today. The Church is the proximate rule of faith, which provides the true understanding of scripture and tradition, which are the dual sources of Jesus Christ’s revelation.
According to our local lunatics . . . . . ( Prior to 1611 and there King James Bible )(1) All catholics go to hell. (2) They can trace there origins back to AD 33, some as far back as the Flood. The pesky 1500 years is a Rather Large Gap, for those with a Brain Cell, but they have no problem with Gap Theory. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #34 on: July 18, 2012, 12:28:01 AM » |
|
According to our local lunatics . . . . .
( Prior to 1611 and there King James Bible )
(1) All catholics go to hell.
(2) They can trace there origins back to AD 33, some as far back as the Flood.
The pesky 1500 years is a Rather Large Gap, for those with a Brain Cell, but they have no problem with Gap Theory.
yes Mr Galton Darwin you obviously have the bigger brain (cell)  anywho here's some scripture to go over your rationalist humanist brain "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." ps catholics can be saved it's just that the doctrine is so leavened people usually go rogue like pinocchio, i mean david |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
Jacob Law
|
|
« Reply #35 on: July 18, 2012, 06:01:10 AM » |
|
According to our local lunatics . . . . .
( Prior to 1611 and there King James Bible )
(1) All catholics go to hell.
(2) They can trace there origins back to AD 33, some as far back as the Flood.
The pesky 1500 years is a Rather Large Gap, for those with a Brain Cell, but they have no problem with Gap Theory.
2 Corinthians 8:12 For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What do you under-stand?
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #36 on: July 19, 2012, 08:48:36 PM » |
|
yes Mr Galton Darwin you obviously have the bigger brain (cell) anywho here's some scripture to go over your rationalist humanist brain "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." ps catholics can be saved it's just that the doctrine is so leavened people usually go rogue like pinocchio, i mean david one of us has to be wrong James 2:24- “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” and that would be you p.s you can't be saved until you change your heretical ways |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #37 on: July 19, 2012, 09:37:44 PM » |
|
one of us has to be wrong
James 2:24- “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”
and that would be you
p.s you can't be saved until you change your heretical ways
dood! why can you only take things out of context? read the whole thing,your not fooling anyone James 2:18"Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." faith is trust in god, works and good deeds is the proof/result of your love of god. Your talk is backed up with action like the example of Abraham willing to sacrifice his son for his trust in God. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
DAVIDE MTL
|
|
« Reply #38 on: July 20, 2012, 04:04:08 PM » |
|
dood! why can you only take things out of context? read the whole thing,your not fooling anyone
James 2:18"Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works."
faith is trust in god, works and good deeds is the proof/result of your love of god. Your talk is backed up with action like the example of Abraham willing to sacrifice his son for his trust in God.
good so you believe in faith AND works, took you long enough to come around |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
goforward
|
|
« Reply #39 on: July 20, 2012, 08:17:08 PM » |
|
you only take things out of context
http://www.justforcatholics.org/a14.htmvery different you're not fooling anyone |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Matthew 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
|
|
|
|
