All I Want Is Evidence

[tGette]

**+Come, Holy Spirit+
**
By the grace of God I am starting this thread and it is a sincere request…so…I am seeking honest answers. Because of that I ask that everyone, please, pray for the gift of charity before responding!

This is directed mostly for Non-Catholics. Anyone can join in!

We see great evidence (historical) of division anytime a theology and/or belief is challenged. We see evidence of this in the Roman Catholic and Orthodox schism. We see this in the Protestant Reformation. (Well at the time it was political but turned theological). We see this in all the Protestant churches splitting amongst each other. Regardless, we see great uproars in certain times of history of great changes occurring in the Christian community.

So onto my question(s): (Sorry if there are too many questions on this thread)

If, indeed, as non-Catholics tell us, the Catholic Church did adopt false doctrines down the line, then where is the evidence for this? Can anyone give me any specific dates?

Why are there not churches splitting when these “false doctrines” were being introduced? Do you not think people would try to refute what they once believed as they were now being told they had to adopt a new belief?

Was the Catholic Church that good at creating new doctrines that the churches that existed everywhere through out the world other than Rome were somehow able to adopt these changes? It is not like they had the internet or cell phones to just call up the local Bishops and tell them “We are deciding to say that Mary is a perpetual virgin now.” I mean, if Rome did make changes and then you traveled to a church in a different country, you would expect them to believe something different, right?
*
The point I am trying to get at is that if the Church was making changes there would be people/churches at those times who would disagree and there would have been many churches/beliefs WAY before the Protestant Reformation. There would be an historical event of people arguing over new doctrines being introduced to the Christian faith.*

I hope I explained myself well enough. Please let me know if clarity is needed.

Thanks!

May His Peace be with us all!

 

[Nickkname]

Historically speaking, there have always been divisions in the Catholic Church. Not only in false beliefs but also in good ways, in different traditions and rites. The bad ways, the heresies, like Arianism, have polluted the waters of Christianity ever since its rise; they are like parasites who attach themselves to the religion of the Word and use it to suck out its own blood, so to speak (sorry for the graphic description). Gnostism was a Roman cult that attached itself to every single religion, so of course it had attached itself to Christian, by denying the body of Christ and His death and saying Judas had secret knowledge and so on and so forth. But despite the evil divisions, the Church has been One. The good devisions, the different traditions and rites which the Catholic Church enjoys, do not divide the Church but unite her, make her universal, aiding in bringing the Gospel to all nations. Becuase the Eucharist makes the Church, the Church will last til the end of the world, when Jesus Christ will come in glory and bring His Bride into glory.

 

[tGette]

Historically speaking, there have always been divisions in the Catholic Church. Not only in false beliefs but also in good ways, in different traditions and rites. The bad ways, the heresies, like Arianism, have polluted the waters of Christianity ever since its rise; they are like parasites who attach themselves to the religion of the Word and use it to suck out its own blood, so to speak (sorry for the graphic description). Gnostism was a Roman cult that attached itself to every single religion, so of course it had attached itself to Christian, by denying the body of Christ and His death and saying Judas had secret knowledge and so on and so forth. But despite the evil divisions, the Church has been One. The good devisions, the different traditions and rites which the Catholic Church enjoys, do not divide the Church but unite her, make her universal, aiding in bringing the Gospel to all nations. Becuase the Eucharist makes the Church, the Church will last til the end of the world, when Jesus Christ will come in glory and bring His Bride into glory.

Right…evidence of others trying to claim different beliefs. But never evidence of the Catholic Church changing beliefs and people splitting because of it, right?

 

[Nickkname]

There is no historical evidence that the Church has changed her beliefs. There is evidence she has changed some of her practices, like indulgences and the Mass, but not her beliefs.

People have split from the Church ever since the birth of Christianity. Why, many of Jesus’ disciples even left Him when He told them He was the Bread from Heaven. They had their reasons, I’m sure, but it dosen’t mean Christianity is false. Man can even deny the truth and claim it to be a lie when he comes face to face with it, just as Pilate denied Jesus Christ.

If there was evidence that the Church has changed her beliefs, the world would know it by now. But when you look through all of the writings of the Church Fathers and all of the Church documents, you don’t find false beliefs but rather the same beliefs, the same truths.

 

[Ag_not]

The Filioque ?

Added by the western church without the knowledge of the eastern church, for which they got very very upset and slamed the door behind them?

I think?

Have I oversimplified it???

 

[tGette]

The Filioque ?

Added by the western church without the knowledge of the eastern church, for which they got very very upset and slamed the door behind them?

I think?

Have I oversimplified it???

Well…this one is exempt because I mentioned it in the Orthodox/Catholic Schism.

Besides…if I am not allowed to post on your threads, then you cannot post on mine!

I think it is time for you to feel the wrath of the naughty step! And it’s cold too!

 

[Ag_not]

Well…this one is exempt because I mentioned it in the Orthodox/Catholic Schism.

Besides…if I am not allowed to post on your threads, then you cannot post on mine!

I think it is time for you to feel the wrath of the naughty step! And it’s cold too!

Oh ok then

View attachment 4373

 

[tGette]

Oh ok then

View attachment 4373

That’s not fair…
The forum policy states specifically that you are not allowed to make me feel bad with images of little kids! Seriously…look it up! You are definitely banned from this thread now! You even made me post off topic too! (by the way…that is actually a picture of my face!)

On a serious note, is the girl wearing those gloves because she is a Soccer goalie? (See, I told you, a serious note.)

Here is my sad face because my threads never get participation. I am going to the naughty step, but right now it needs to be renamed to the “wallowing in my own self pity step” because I have some sulking to do.

I changed my mind…I am putting out a perpetual ordinance that, regardless of circumstance, you can post on any of my threads and you can never be banned even if you are rude, and make off-color and off topic remarks. Simply because, at least you participate! For that I thank you! You just have to do it FROM the naughty step. We’ll give you a laptop!

 

[Ag_not]

I changed my mind…I am putting out a perpetual ordinance that, regardless of circumstance, you can post on any of my threads and you can never be banned even if you are rude, and make off-color and off topic remarks. Simply because, at least you participate! For that I thank you! You just have to do it FROM the naughty step. We’ll give you a laptop!

See, I knew you had a heart of gold

Can I have one a bit smaller than the one you showed me last week. It’s great, it’s just I think you misunderstood the size issue

View attachment 4374

 

[tGette]

See, I knew you had a heart of gold

Can I have one a bit smaller than the one you showed me last week. It’s great, it’s just I think you misunderstood the size issue

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=4374&thumb=1&d=1224738535

My gosh! LOL! His screen is not even on! He went through all that trouble just to pretend!?!

Well…as long as duct tape is cheaper than laptops, we are going to make you stick with this model. Sorry…

 

[Ag_not]

Im sooo sorry tGette

Im going to be good now and tidy up after myself and you’ll never even know Ive been here

I’m very interested in this thread - they’re great questions - and look forward to reading it tomorrow.

Goodnight and God Bless.

 

[tGette]

Im sooo sorry tGette

Im going to be good now and tidy up after myself and you’ll never even know Ive been here

I’m very interested in this thread - they’re great questions - and look forward to reading it tomorrow.

Goodnight and God Bless.

Let’s just pray we get responses!

Good night! I am glad to see you are turning in early! Thata girl!

God bless you too!

 

[Sabbath_Keeper]

Wow after all that I forgot what the question was!!

 

[ralphinal]

The Filioque ?

Added by the western church without the knowledge of the eastern church, for which they got very very upset and slamed the door behind them?

I think?

Have I oversimplified it???

Yes, you have but there are many reasons to do so.

If we skip ahead to the crux of the matter, Rome added it either without knowing or caring that it did not translate correctly into Greek, making it seem heretical. Honestly, I think that it was more an excuse than a cause, as the two sides were drifting farther and farther apart anyway.

Hopefully, this will not be a thread about that one issue, as it gets beaten to death enough.

 

[happilycatholic]

Does it matter that catholics are the only ones practicing the faith as Jesus instructed the Apostles?

I’m not trying to knock others, it’s just an observation…

 

[Laurent_LUG]

Why are there not churches splitting when these “false doctrines” were being introduced? Do you not think people would try to refute what they once believed as they were now being told they had to adopt a new belief?

If ALL religions claim to be the true one ,
what’s the use to split or even create new one ?? …

Salute & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:
– Laurent LUG (.@…), october 23, 2008

 

[steve_b]

If we skip ahead to the crux of the matter, Rome added it either without knowing or caring that it did not translate correctly into Greek, making it seem heretical.

After the tons of ink spilled on this subject, do you REALLY think that’s the way it happened?

ralph:

Hopefully, this will not be a thread about that one issue, as it gets beaten to death enough.

True.

 

[sambos671]

If, indeed, as non-Catholics tell us, the Catholic Church did adopt false doctrines down the line, then where is the evidence for this? Can anyone give me any specific dates?

Most fundalmentalist Christians will tell you the problem started during the apostles and continued down to this day, however, most will point to Constantine and say that putting the emperor over the church in church theological systems was the begining of the Roman Catholic Church. At Nicea Constantine presided over the 1st ecuminical council and made the bishops play nice. Every council after that had some emperor participation (I’m think of the main 7) Giving Roman Goverment organization to the Church Hirearchy. And the begining of Mary Veneration due to his mother’s specific devotion to the virgin.

The point I am trying to get at is that if the Church was making changes there would be people/churches at those times who would disagree and there would have been many churches/beliefs WAY before the Protestant Reformation. There would be an historical event of people arguing over new doctrines being introduced to the Christian faith.

There are many incidents of dissention from what the church was trying to teach. Orthodox would recognize this as would protestants. Origen discented, Jerome discented, Apollinarius discented, Tertullian discented, Nestorius discented,John Chrysotom discented. Does this answer your questions?

Was the Catholic Church that good at creating new doctrines that the churches that existed everywhere through out the world other than Rome were somehow able to adopt these changes? It is not like they had the internet or cell phones to just call up the local Bishops and tell them “We are deciding to say that Mary is a perpetual virgin now.” I mean, if Rome did make changes and then you traveled to a church in a different country, you would expect them to believe something different, right?

Most protestants would say that the lay people not being educated believed what the priest tells them. However, we see during the ecuminical councils many theological difficulties that went straight to preaching without church wide acceptance leading many people astray. The truth of the matter is simply this the Apostles didn’t directly relate to many held doctrines today for instance the apostles creed was formed over many years over several councils to what we see today. The apostles never taught that but the bishops concluded that the creed or the symbol of faith best represented what the apostles meant in their deposit of faith. Catholic Church seems to get into problems (in the protestant thinking) when it tries to define issues and say this is the only way of understanding it. Like going from Theotokos to Co-redemtrix. Orthodox don’t hold the Co-redemtrix point of view but they hold Theotokos.

 

[steve_b]

The point I am trying to get at is that if the Church was making changes there would be people/churches at those times who would disagree and there would have been many churches/beliefs WAY before the Protestant Reformation. There would be an historical event of people arguing over new doctrines being introduced to the Christian faith.

Just a few comments

1. 
   ]St Paul says to the Church of Rome 17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them. 18 For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, * and by fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded. 19* For while your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, I would have you wise as to what is good and guileless as to what is evil; 20* then the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. [Rm 16:17-20]
   *]Clement of Rome ~80 a.d. settled sedition among Greek bishops in Corinth. Already the papacy is exercising authority DURING apostolic times. St John is still alive and residing either on Patmos or in Ephesus. He has not written the book of Revelation yet.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm
   *]**Ignatius **of Antioch ~107 a.d. calls the Church the Catholic Church, and says in his letter to the Romans, the Church of Rome which (presides)holds the presidency newadvent.org/fathers/0107.htm
   *]Polycarp, disciple of St John the apostle, discipled Irenaeus. Irrenaeus wrote ~180 a.d. In his “against heresies” he writes all must agree with the Church of Rome because of her superior origin (based on Peter and Paul) NOT because Rome the city was the capital of the empire. newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm
   And the history goes on.

 

[steve_b]

Most fundalmentalist Christians will tell you the problem started during the apostles and continued down to this day, however, most will point to Constantine and say that putting the emperor over the church in church theological systems was the begining of the Roman Catholic Church.

The emperor is NOT over the Church. The Church had to find ways to live with the emperors.
sambo:

At Nicea Constantine presided over the 1st ecuminical council and made the bishops play nice. Every council after that had some emperor participation (I’m think of the main 7) Giving Roman Goverment organization to the Church Hirearchy. And the begining of Mary Veneration due to his mother’s specific devotion to the virgin.

Emperor participation doesn’t mean they controled the council. The authority of the Catholic Church didn’t come from council or emperor. It came from Jesus Christ.
sambo:

There are many incidents of dissention from what the church was trying to teach. Orthodox would recognize this as would protestants. Origen discented, Jerome discented, Apollinarius discented, Tertullian discented, Nestorius discented,John Chrysotom discented. Does this answer your questions?

Nestorius ,Tertullian, Apollinarius, and Origen fell into heresy. Jerome and Chrysostom are doctors of the Church.
sambo:

Most protestants would say that the lay people not being educated believed what the priest tells them. However, we see during the ecuminical councils many theological difficulties that went straight to preaching without church wide acceptance leading many people astray.

Like what?
sambo:

The truth of the matter is simply this the Apostles didn’t directly relate to many held doctrines today for instance the apostles creed was formed over many years over several councils to what we see today. The apostles never taught that but the bishops concluded that the creed or the symbol of faith best represented what the apostles meant in their deposit of faith. Catholic Church seems to get into problems (in the protestant thinking) when it tries to define issues and say this is the only way of understanding it. Like going from Theotokos to Co-redemtrix. Orthodox don’t hold the Co-redemtrix point of view but they hold Theotokos.

Co-redemtrix is NOT a teaching of the Catholic Church. Although I personally have no problem with it properly explained.

Re: creeds, they synthesize the faith. Memorized, they answer what a person believes point by point. One doesn’t have to construct their own answer on the spot, that might be very lacking.