Did Jesus write the Bible or build a church?

[fellowChristian]

Might I ask where in the bible does it say that the bible is the sole authority?

I see in 1Timothy 3:15 it says

**1 Timothy 3:15 **

15 but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the** household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth. **

**It does not say the bible is the “pillar and support of all truth” it says the church is.

And if you lived anytime before 1517 all the way back to the time of Christ the “church” they are talking about is the Catholic Church.

So let me ask you a question did Christ build a church or did He write a book?

Did the church write a book or did the Bible build a church?

Remember the Apostles? They were the Church at the begining.Then 3000 were added that day.**

Acts 2:41
So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about **three thousand souls. **

42They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ **teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. **

**3000 souls added that day! Added to what?

The Bible? Or The Church?
And notice how the “devoted themselves”. I don’t see “reading the bible.”**
**
And what about this verse?**

**John 20:30 **

30 Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which **are not written in this book; **

Where is the rest?

And if you are a Christian who believes in Christ and you lived in 1516 you were Catholic.
1413? Catholic
1300? Catholic
1289? Catholic
1179? Catholic
1000? Catholic
900,800,700,600,500,400,300,200,100,99,80,70,67? Catholic.

Why? Because Martin Luther (a Catholic) had not been excommunicated until 1517 and had not started the Lutheran Denomination.The first in a series of other Denominations.

King Henry the VIII (Catholic) until he made himself a “pope” of the Church of England.

Trace a church! Go on I dare you! You will trace it back to the Catholic Church. How old is your Church?

 

[fellowChristian]

I’ll do a couple for you
**
Pentecostal**
Who founded it?
Charles Fox Parham in 1901
What was he before?
Methodist
Who founded it?
James and Charles Wesley in 1744
What were they?
Church of England
Who started it?
King Henry the VIII in 1534
What was he before?
Catholic

 

[Penitant]

"If you are a Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex- monk of the Catholic Church, in the year 1517.

If you belong to the Church of England, your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the Pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.

If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded by John Knox in Scotland in the year 1560.

If you are a Protestant Episcopalian, your religion was an offshoot of the Church of England founded by Samuel Seabury in the American colonies in the 17th century.

If you are a Congregationalist, your religion was originated by Robert Brown in Holland in 1582.

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 church in London in 1774.

If you are a Mormon (Latter Day Saints), Joseph Smith started your religion in Palmyra, N.Y., in 1829.

If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1605.

If you are of the Dutch Reformed church, you recognize Michaelis Jones as founder, because he originated your religion in New York in 1628.

If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.

If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year in which your religion was born and to Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy as its founder.

If you belong to one of the religious organizations known as 'Church of the Nazarene," “Pentecostal Gospel.” “Holiness Church,” “Pilgrim Holiness Church,” “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” your religion is one of the hundreds of new sects founded by men within the past century."

• ewtn.com/faith/teachings/churb4.htm

 

[fellowChristian]

The last part of that

If you are Catholic, you know that your religion was founded in the year 33 by Jesus Christ the Son of God, and it is still the same Church.

 

[fellowChristian]

the second one:

Amish

Who founded it?

Jacob Amman in 1693

What was he before that?

Mennonite

Who founded that?

Menno Simons in 1525

What was he before that?

Anabaptist
**
Who founded that?**

Thomas Munzer and Nicholas Storch in 1521
**
What were they before that?**

Catholic

 

[fellowChristian]

One more:

Quakers

Who founded it?

George Fox in 1649

What was he before that?

Presbyterian

Who founded it?

John Knox in 1560
**
What was he before that?**

Calvinist

Who founded it?

John Calvin in 1555

What was he before that?

Catholic

 

[fellowChristian]

Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

Matthew 18:17
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Acts 5:11
Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

Acts 8:1
And Saul was there, giving approval to his death. The Church Persecuted and Scattered ] On that day a great persecution broke out against **the ****church **at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.

Acts 8:3
But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.

Acts 9:31
Then the** church **throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord.

1 Corinthians 1:2
To the **church of God **in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours:

The Church. one, singular body. Christ had only one body.

It can’t be a Protestant or a non-denominational church they weren’t around until after 1517. And only the Old Testament was written at that time.

 

[Teflon93]

Matthew 16:18
And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

Matthew 18:17
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Acts 5:11
Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

Acts 8:1
And Saul was there, giving approval to his death. The Church Persecuted and Scattered ] On that day a great persecution broke out against **the ****church **at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.

Acts 8:3
But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.

Acts 9:31
Then the** church **throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria enjoyed a time of peace. It was strengthened; and encouraged by the Holy Spirit, it grew in numbers, living in the fear of the Lord.

1 Corinthians 1:2
To the **church of God **in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours:

The Church. one, singular body. Christ had only one body.

It can’t be a Protestant or a non-denominational church they weren’t around until after 1517. And only the Old Testament was written at that time.

There you go with those inconvenient facts again.

 

[fellowChristian]

Teflon93 I love You

 

[avflf]

It can’t be a Protestant or a non-denominational church they weren’t around until after 1517. And only the Old Testament was written at that time.

Ah! yes, quite true … though the Catholic Church of the 1st century differed considerably from the Roman Church of the 4th century and, anyway, the Protestants all feel they are following in the footsteps of Aquila and Priscilla by “expounding the way of God more perfectly”
Here’s the relevant passage:
(Act 18:24) And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.

(Act 18:25) This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

(Act 18:26) And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

 

[Teflon93]

Teflon93 I love You

Right back at you, FC, and you clearly love Truth as well.

 

[ForwardProgress]

Ah! yes, quite true … though the Catholic Church of the 1st century differed considerably from the Roman Church of the 4th century and, anyway, the Protestants all feel they are following in the footsteps of Aquila and Priscilla by “expounding the way of God more perfectly”
Here’s the relevant passage:
(Act 18:24) And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.

(Act 18:25) This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

(Act 18:26) And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

Not quite sure of that…Early Church Father’s writings from earlier than the 4th seem to describe liturgies that the church uses still today.

TCRNews.com

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Grunwald's crucifixion, Paul Tillich calls it the first truly modern painting of the crucifixion

IV. THE LITURGICAL CELEBRATION OF THE EUCHARIST

"The Mass of all ages"

1345 As early as the second century we have the witness of St. Justin Martyr for the basic lines of the order of the Eucharistic celebration. They have stayed the same until our own day for all the great liturgical families. St. Justin wrote to the pagan emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161) around the year 155, explaining what Christians did:

    On the day we call the day of the sun, all who dwell in the city or country gather in the same place.

    The memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as much as time permits.

    When the reader has finished, he who presides over those gathered admonishes and challenges them to imitate these beautiful things.

    Then we all rise together and offer prayers* for ourselves . . .and for all others, wherever they may be, so that we may be found righteous by our life and actions, and faithful to the commandments, so as to obtain eternal salvation.

    When the prayers are concluded we exchange the kiss.

    Then someone brings bread and a cup of water and wine mixed together to him who presides over the brethren.

    He takes them and offers praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and for a considerable time he gives thanks (in Greek: eucharistian) that we have been judged worthy of these gifts.

    When he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all present give voice to an acclamation by saying: 'Amen.'

    When he who presides has given thanks and the people have responded, those whom we call deacons give to those present the "eucharisted" bread, wine and water and take them to those who are absent.169 

1346 The liturgy of the Eucharist unfolds according to a fundamental structure which has been preserved throughout the centuries down to our own day. It displays two great parts that form a fundamental unity:

- the gathering, the liturgy of the Word, with readings, homily and general intercessions;
- the liturgy of the Eucharist, with the presentation of the bread and wine, the consecratory thanksgiving, and communion.

The liturgy of the Word and liturgy of the Eucharist together form "one single act of worship";170 the Eucharistic table set for us is the table both of the Word of God and of the Body of the Lord.171

TCR Note: Emphasis ours. Thus the "New" Mass is hardly a new rite at all but a very old one.

End Notes

169 St. Justin, Apol. 1, 65-67: PG 6, 428-429; the text before the asterisk (*) is from chap. 67.

So how do you explain this…that the Roman Church as we know it today was in the 4th century?? This was written in 155AD…pretty early Christian Church if you ask me!

 

[Ani_Ibi]

There you go with those inconvenient facts again.

Here are some more inconvenient facts:

1. … Scripture says “And the Word became Flesh” (Jn1:1) It doesn’t say “and the Word became paper.” God became Flesh, He instituted and commissioned his Church…

1. … Some Evangelicals might say that that the Bible is self-explanatory and needs no interpretation. They say, “the main things are the plain things.” My response would be that the Evangelical movement itself does not support that statement…

1. … What many Evangelicals do not know is that no mainstream Evangelical denomination agrees with the writings of the early reformers on some fundamental issues; for instance, the perpetual virginity of Mary, the role of the Eucharist, contraception, etc…

1. … Martin Luther’s writings (even after the reform) are closer to Catholicism than they are to modern ECLA Lutherans…

1. … The Evangelical who reads the Bible in English, is already reading someone else’s interpretation of Scripture… The minute we walk into Church and hear a pastor’s sermon we are influenced on Bible interpretation… these Evangelical sources act as teaching authorities, the way the Vatican does for Catholics.

1. … I totally agree that Jesus is Lord, but if that is all we needed to know then I wonder why He gave us 1500 pages of Scripture. He could have just showed up for a day and said “I’m Lord” and did a big miracle and split, but He didn’t. He taught his apostles, who were the Church, for 3 years…

1. … Jesus did not write any books of the Bible. Jesus chose NOT to write but rather to build his Church, and 30-60 years later He inspired the members of his Church to write down the Gospels. Several hundred years after that, He inspired members of his Church to decide what books belong in the Bible…

 

[mtr01]

Ah! yes, quite true … though the Catholic Church of the 1st century differed considerably from the Roman Church of the 4th century

Specifics?

avflf:

and, anyway, the Protestants all feel they are following in the footsteps of Aquila and Priscilla by “expounding the way of God more perfectly”
Here’s the relevant passage:
(Act 18:24) And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.

(Act 18:25) This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

(Act 18:26) And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

It seems as though you got your similies mixed up. Aquila and Priscilla were members of the Church, while Apollos was not (your quote says he was a Jew). Based on this quote, it seems more appropriate that Protestants would be like Apollos…here is my reworking of the passage to demonstrate the more accurate similies:

(Act 18:24) And a certain Protesatant named Pastor Mike, born at America, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Catholic Answers…

(Act 18:25) This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the Bible.

(Act 18:26) And he began to speak boldly in the forums: whom when Father Smith and Deacon Browm had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

Of course I’m not trying to change the Word of God in the Scriptures…however, based on your post, I believe the above is the more accurate representation.

 

[estesbob]

Ah! yes, quite true … though the Catholic Church of the 1st century differed considerably from the Roman Church of the 4th century .

In what way?

 

[avflf]

avflf:

Ah! yes, quite true … though the Catholic Church of the 1st century differed considerably from the Roman Church of the 4th century

mtr01:

Specifics?

For one they baptised in the name of Jesus and they did not pray to departed spirits

mtr01:

It seems as though you got your similies mixed up. Aquila and Priscilla were members of the Church, while Apollos was not (your quote says he was a Jew). Based on this quote, it seems more appropriate that Protestants would be like Apollos…here is my reworking of the passage to demonstrate the more accurate similies:

(Act 18:24) And a certain Protesatant named Pastor Mike, born at America, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Catholic Answers…

(Act 18:25) This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the Bible.

(Act 18:26) And he began to speak boldly in the forums: whom when Father Smith and Deacon Browm had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.

Heh, heh, heh. Protestants believe, of couse, that the first character was Father Smith and that Aquila and Priscilla were the Reverends Billy Graham and Jimmy Swaggart. Ah! The beauty of disagreement. How dull it would be without it?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

avflf:

Ah! yes, quite true … though the Catholic Church of the 1st century differed considerably from the Roman Church of the 4th century…

mtr01:

Specifics?

I am not sure where avflf is going with this. Perhaps, as you suggest mtr, he could give us specifics.

But, if the point is that the 1st C Catholic Church differed from the 4th C Catholic Church in ways which served to anathemize and therefore de-legitimize Herself – then I would question the logic of that.

So, if the Church did change, did She change Her dogma or merely Her inculturation? The distinction between dogma and inculturation is not minor.

But that distinction may get lost in the shuffle if some Reformist teachers gloss over it and if some Reformist students allow themselves to be dazzled by rhetorical glitter and political charisma rather than settling down to the unglamorous work of analyzing claims for their veracity.

Often we have been pointing out that the Reformers’ claims for authority beg the big question of the millenium and a half or so of history which – if their claims held any weight (and they don’t) – would have had to have been left empty of a Church, contrary to the promise given to us by Jesus Himself.

Or been left with a heretical Church and 30 000 denominations which existed in secret until Rev Luther could lead them out into the sunshine of the Reformation.

To that I say: Are we now being asked to consider that the Saga of the Softening of Language allows for a theory which holds that it may not have been 1.5 millenium , but only 1.0 millenium? I don’t get it. Can someone explain how this is progress in the dialogue between Semper Reformanda and the Great Tradition?

Well, let’s be fair; it could be. Perhaps, for instance, the Reformers are proposing that the Church might find it fun to bargain for years of legitimacy in much the same way that Abraham bargained for righteous men at Sodom.

continued…

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Or perhaps this is (one of the many) shifting chapters in the current Saga of the Softening of Language. But did the Reformers negotiate that with us – or just decide? Bottom line is that it often looks as if we are talking at cross purposes, if at all. And this is not good.

When I consider the term ‘Softening of Language’, for instance, what comes to my mind is some form of rapprochement. So you can imagine how giddy I get anticipating progress toward the ecclesial unity for which Jesus prayed.

And other sheep I have that are not of this fold: them also I must bring. And they shall hear my voice: And there shall be one fold and one shepherd. Jn 10:16 DRC

And now I am not in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name whom thou hast given me: that they may be one, as we also are. Jn 17:11 DRC

And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me. That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them: that, they may be one, as we also are one.
I in them, and thou in me: that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me. Jn 17:20-23 DRC

But when I examine the spectrum of what some Reformers are proposing these days, it often seems to be that ‘Softening of Language’ is constantly shifting-- equivocal – relativistic – bait-and-switch – political.

In fact some times I wonder if the architects of the Softening of Language are not building a Trojan Horse.



Well, whatever. No worries. Big question in my mind, is how the horse is going to get across the Tiber. We could teach it to swim, you know.



mtr01 and avflf: for those of us who are not yet deeply conversant with the Early Church here is some info.

A Timeline of Church History and

Apostolic Fathers are those before 200A.D. and who were directly influenced or taught by the apostles. They include:

Clement (d. 97) Bishop of Rome and Catholics believe third successor to Peter as Pope,

Ignatius, (50-107),

Polycarp (69-155),

Justin Martyr (100-165),

St. Irenaeus (130-202),

Cyprian (210-258)

The Early Church Fathers lived between 200 and 800 A.D.

And to read the Early Church Fathers go here

 

[estesbob]

For one they baptised in the name of Jesus and they did** not pray to departed spirits**

Another angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God" (Rev. 8:3–4).

In this way is he [the true Christian] always pure for prayer. He also prays in the society of angels, as being already of angelic rank, and he is never out of their holy keeping, and though he pray alone, he has the choir of the saints standing with him [in prayer] (Miscellanies 7:12 [A.D. 208]).

But not the high priest [Christ] alone prays for those who pray sincerely, but also the angels . . . as also the souls of the saints who have already fallen asleep (Prayer 11 [A.D. 233]).

 

[Ani_Ibi]

avflf:

For one they baptised in the name of Jesus and they did not pray to departed spirits.

Who? The 1C ‘Catholic’ Church? Or the 4th C ‘Roman’ Church?

Oh and you are going to have to do better than that. Saying something does not make it so. If you have any evidence for what you say, please share it with us so that we can understand your line of reasoning. For I believe that this is still a discussion board and therefore effective communication is still ever so important.

avflf:

Heh, heh, heh. Protestants believe, of couse, that the first character was Father Smith and that Aquila and Priscilla were the Reverends Billy Graham and Jimmy Swaggart. Ah! The beauty of disagreement. How dull it would be without it?

Heh heh heh. And how quickly doth mere rhetorical glitter pale before the fullsome loveliness of disagreement!