Catholic Church founded by Jesus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Glenn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote="Buzzard3, post:234, topic:620074,

Even funnier is that Sola Scriptura-ists worship the Bible, but they (generally) despise the Catholic Church that was responsible for deciding on the canon of the Bible. What strange logic. Apparently, God had no choice but to allow the false “whore of Babylon” church to decide the canon of his holy scriptures - hilarious!
[/quote]

While you may accurately describe some groups and individuals in the non-Catholic world I find it saddening and quite interesting that you resort to the same level of generalization and misconstrument that exposes your own mentality and intelligence to not be so different from the ones you are castigating.
 
Buzzard3 said:
That doesn’t explain why the Spirit compelled him to go the Church leaders in Jerusalem to have his revelation and preaching approved
Click to expand...
Again, so after 14 years since first preaching you go get " approved" as you portray it?

I totally explained a different understanding of why the Spirit led him to Jerusalem and for what specific verification.
 
Last edited:
hope said:
This does not answer who Paul would go to today
Click to expand...
No, not specifically. I would think the closest thing to Jerusalem council would be leaders from Catholics, Orthodox and various Protestants.

A more real question and not hypothetical, is what churches, communities are yielding to the Spirit that confirms Paul’s gospel.That is, what and who is really apostolic today?
 
mcq72 said:
A more real question and not hypothetical, is what churches, communities are yielding to the Spirit that confirms Paul’s gospel.That is, what and who is really apostolic today?
Click to expand...
Paul’s Gospel is no different than Peter’s Gospel, or Thomas’s Gospel, or James’

The same Gospel preached in the Catholic Church today
 
hope said:
You state what the Church was not but do not say what the Church was.
Click to expand...
Correct, I did not. I would think as far as jurisdiction, more along lines of presbyter model, with council as needed. Scripture states there were apostles, who then appointed presbyters/ bishops after them. Scripture says our foundation is the apostles, the twelve.

Even Rome is thought to have had a presbyter of bishops at first. Perhaps why Ignatius did not name any pope/ head bishop in his letter for the large, diverse church.
 
hope said:
Where is that Church of “Apostolic times”
Click to expand...
You are looking for an institutional name today, yet they had no such names then.
Apostolic is as apostolic does.

Is that like a good Jew asking Jesus where is the authority and annointing of the Jews, sons of Abraham and follower of Moses in those days? The Saduccees, Pharisees or Essenes? Did Jesus play the favorite sect game?
 
Last edited:
Justin_Mary said:
Paul’s Gospel is no different than Peter’s Gospel, or Thomas’s Gospel, or James’
Click to expand...
Correct. What I meant to say is per a Calvin commentary, the same Spirit that led Paul to Jerusalem over the dispute led the apostles to concur, validate Paul’s gospel/ministry. So today we can say Paul and all the other apostles had same gospel because of the Spirit’s work in the past. Likewise, the level of synchronization of any church/ community to said gospel today is equal to the level of obedience and maturity in that same Spirit. Apostolic is as apostolic does.
 
Buzzard3 said:
What strange logic.(SS bible folk despising CC, who gave us bible).
Click to expand...
It is only strange logic to those who may shake their head at OSAS, once saved always saved, but not ORAR, once right always right. That is, to those that think because they had a good beginning, the middle and ending must be so also, even unconditionally guaranteed.
 
Last edited:
mcq72 said:
Likewise, the level of synchronization of any church/ community to said gospel today is equal to the level of obedience and maturity in that same Spirit. Apostolic is as apostolic does.
Click to expand...
But they were all of one accord when they left that meeting. We’re far from the same accord today
 
hope said:
Where is it today?
Click to expand...
There are more than a few instututional Christian churches today.

Again a better question is where is Jesus today.
Justin_Mary said:
But they were all of one accord when they left that meeting. We’re far from the same accord today
Click to expand...
But we are of one accord on that issue of Judaizing, as they were.
 
Last edited:
hope said:
Which one has existed since Jesus?
Click to expand...
Yes, Catholics find comfort in saying they are from the beginning, as do Orthodox, and Protestants in a reformed fashion.

I like to reference Job here.

“I said, Days should speak, and multitude of years should teach wisdom. But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.”

Job 32:7‭-‬8 KJV


The older in the Lord had no advantage over youth, for both are dependent on the Lord for understanding, and that conditionally and otherwise not a respector of “age”…the older, Job’s three friends, had a few things wrong and were corrected by Elihu the “newcomer”.
 
Last edited:
MasterHaster said:
For Protestantism to be true it is necessary to believe God allowed his Church to wander in heresy for 1500 years.
Click to expand...
For that to happen (wandering 1500 years in error), Huss’s, Luther’s, Calvin’s Catholic church would have to have been the same as apostolic times of first century. The church of the 16th Century and the first Century covers much development. So some things were held perfectly (Christology for example), others not ( papal office).

Reformers did not reinvent the wheel. The gates of hell did not prevail nor was God slack in His guidance.
 
Last edited:
mcq72 said:
Yes, Catholics find comfort in saying they are from the beginning, as do Orthodox, and Protestants in a reformed fashion.
Click to expand...
The Orthodox were there at the beginning. They were part of the Catholic Church and now they are a schismatic part of the Catholic Church.
 
Montrose said:
The Orthodox were there at the beginning. They were part of the Catholic Church and now they are a schismatic part of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
They never accepted the Catholic development of papal office. It has always been a Catholic assertion.
 
As seen from the only Church (the Catholic Church) established by Christ and entrusted with the Deposit of Faith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top