Early Church not Catholic

[Omar_Gatskill]

Omar Gatskill;8813123:

What about the countless writings of the early church fathers?

Absolutely true. But the RCC has rejected some of those teachings. St. Jerome recommended that the Apocrypha not be included with the OT in the Latin Vulgate. Rome did not concur. Bernard and many others rejected the notion of the Immaculate Conception. Here again, Rome didn’t give those consideration.

 

[rinnie]

I know what it says rinnie, I’m asking you what those traditions specifically are.

There are probally as many oral teachings of the CC if not more then written. I could not even begin to state them all.

But here is a easy one that you can relate to. The Trinity, That is taught to us all by the Oral Traditon of the Church. Trinity is not written in the bible.

 

[Omar_Gatskill]

There are probally as many oral teachings of the CC if not more then written. I could not even begin to state them all.

But here is a easy one that you can relate to. The Trinity, That is taught to us all by the Oral Traditon of the Church. Trinity is not written in the bible.

It’s not? Gosh, I can think of about a dozen times that Scripture almost shouts out the Trinity.

 

[rinnie]

It’s not that simple. You’re making it sound like Scripture plainly draws a map from St. Peter to the Roman Catholic church. It does nothing of the sort. Look at the history of your popes. They are carried into St. Peter’s Basillica on chariots by Vatican guards and are surrounded by a world’s fortune in gold, jewels and other precious properties. Peter on the other hand was a poor fisherman. He wasn’t even a bright guy. He stuck his foot in his mouth just as many times as he rightfully spoke. That’s an enormous contrast and honestly it cannot be denied.

Its is pretty clear. Do the Map, Start with the current Pope do the map backwards you will end with St Peter.

Where did Christ ever tell us that St Peter was ever the sharpest knife in the drawer. He never did. Look at the scripture. After Jesus left they all were scared and hid.

Until the day of Pentecost and the Holy Spirit arrived to the Church as promised, then Peter became the sharpest knife in the drawer! Why? Simple the Advocate the Holy Spirt gave him the words just as Christ said it would be.

 

[rinnie]

It’s not? Gosh, I can think of about a dozen times that Scripture almost shouts out the Trinity.

Show me the word TRINITY! The scripture tell you the CHURCH is the Pilar of all truth, not the bible.

The bible tells you no scripture can be defined by the interpretation of Man, it is by the Holy Spirit that it is defined.

Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to the CHurch to teach in his name, Jesus never said write a book and let eveyone read it and receive the power of the Holy Spiirit.

 

[Omar_Gatskill]

Its is pretty clear. Do the Map, Start with the current Pope do the map backwards you will end with St Peter.

Where did Christ ever tell us that St Peter was ever the sharpest knife in the drawer. He never did. Look at the scripture. After Jesus left they all were scared and hid.

Until the day of Pentecost and the Holy Spirit arrived to the Church as promised, then Peter became the sharpest knife in the drawer! Why? Simple the Advocate the Holy Spirt gave him the words just as Christ said it would be.

You seem to forget about the rest of the Apostles. What about Paul? How many more of his writings are Scripture than Peter’s? And too, why would Paul never even mention not one time the death of Peter in Rome? If Peter was everything you say he was, it would have been one of the high points if not THE high point of Pauls writings, but yet Scripture is totally Silent here. Why?

 

[Omar_Gatskill]

Show me the word TRINITY! The scripture tell you the CHURCH is the Pilar of all truth, not the bible.

The bible tells you no scripture can be defined by the interpretation of Man, it is by the Holy Spirit that it is defined.

Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to the CHurch to teach in his name, Jesus never said write a book and let eveyone read it and receive the power of the Holy Spiirit.

No wait a minute. You were talking about the Trinity. Lets stay on that. The Bible never used the word Trinity, but the truth of the trinity is all through the NT. The command of baptizing your whole household in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus being the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was GOD. Just to show a couple. Jesus saying that the father and I are one. Jesus tells the Apostles that if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the father. There are many more. You cannot deny the Trinity is all throughout Scripture.

 

[rinnie]

You seem to forget about the rest of the Apostles. What about Paul? How many more of his writings are Scripture than Peter’s? And too, why would Paul never even mention not one time the death of Peter in Rome? If Peter was everything you say he was, it would have been one of the high points if not THE high point of Pauls writings, but yet Scripture is totally Silent here. Why?

Really, Scripture is silent. Tell me this why did St Peter get up in the Council and make the decisions then, Why did St Paul not buck him.

What do you think of this scripture.

Acts. My brothers and sisters you are WELL AWARE ( he was talking to the Apostles and elders of the Church read it) that from early days GOD made his CHOICE among us that THROUGH MY MOUTH the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.

I never forgot about any Apostles, I said God made his choice of the leader and its Peter. Go read it.

 

[rinnie]

No wait a minute. You were talking about the Trinity. Lets stay on that. The Bible never used the word Trinity, but the truth of the trinity is all through the NT. The command of baptizing your whole household in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus being the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was GOD. Just to show a couple. Jesus saying that the father and I are one. Jesus tells the Apostles that if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the father. There are many more. You cannot deny the Trinity is all throughout Scripture.

I said and let me repeat, where is the word TRINITY in the bible? It is not. The word TRINITY came from Sacred Tradition.

I never asked you to show me the truth of the Trinity in the bible I asked for the word.

And who but the Church with Sacred Tradition AGAIN explains the Trinity to us. The bible does not teach. The Apostles were told to PREACH and TEACH the good news. Where did Christ tell them to write the good news??

 

[Ignatius]

I was speaking with a non-Catholic Christian over Christmas about Sacred Scripture and he - knowing that I was Catholic said, “…of course, the Early Church was not Catholic, they like to say that they were, but there is no indication of that.”.

We have records of complete liturgies beginning with the Liturgy of St. James. They are certainly not protestant liturgies.

Here’s a little something else you might as him:
Do you have any idea when your church was founded and by whom? You may find this enlightening:

If you are of the Catholic faith, Jesus Christ founded your Church in the year A.D. 30.
If you are Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk in the Catholic Church, in 1517.
If you are Anabaptist, your religion was founded by Nicholas Storch and Thomas Munzer in Germany in 1521.
If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), 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 belong to the Mennonites, your church was started in 1536 by Menno Simons in Switzerland.
If you are a Calvinist, Jon Calvin started your belief system in 1555 in Switzerland.
If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded when John Knox brought the teachings of John Calvin to Scotland in the Year 1560.
If you are Unitarian, your group developed in Europe in the 1500s.
If you are a Congregationalist, your religion branched off Puritanism in the early 1600s in England.
If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1607.
If you are Dutch Reformed, Michaelis Jones founded your church in New York in 1628.
If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.
If you are an Episcopalian, your church came from England to the American colonies. It formed a separate religion founded by Samuel Seabury in 1789.
If you are a Campellite Christian Church, your religion was started by Thomas and Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone at a revival held at Bushy Creek around 1836.
If you are a Mormon (Latter-day Saints), Joseph Smith started your church in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1830.
If you are Seventh Day Adventist, your religion was founded by Ellen Whitein 1844 in Washington, New Hampshire.
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 your religion was founded by Mary Baker Eddy.
If you are a Jehovah’s Witness, your religion was founded by Charles Taze Russell in Pennsylvania in the 1870s.
If you’re Church of Christ, your church broke of from the Campellites in 1906.
If you are Pentecostal, your religion was started in the Topeka, Kansas in 1901 by Charles F. Parkham
If you are Assemblies of God your church grew out of Pentecostalism in 1914 in Hot Springs, Az.
If you are a member of Four-square Gospel, your church was started by Aimee Semple McPherson in L.A. in 1917.
If your Church of Christ, your church broke of from the Campellites in 1906.
If you are Calvary Chapel, Chuck Smith founded your church in Costa Mesa, Ca, 1965
If your organization is “evangelical nondenominational Christian” your group started in the 1970s by protestant evangelists.
If you are Messianic Christian, your religion was founded around 2000 by Evangelical Protestants and retains many of the doctrines of Protestantism devised in the 1600’s.

 

[CopticChristian]

No wait a minute. You were talking about the Trinity. Lets stay on that. The Bible never used the word Trinity, but the truth of the trinity is all through the NT. The command of baptizing your whole household in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus being the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was GOD. Just to show a couple. Jesus saying that the father and I are one. Jesus tells the Apostles that if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the father. There are many more. You cannot deny the Trinity is all throughout Scripture.

Well Omar that is fantastic. The problem is now settled. There is no concern for anyone. Everyone sees clearly that the Trinity is all in the Bible. They read it and of course now we can just forget the Ebionites, Arians, One Pentacostals, JW & Mormons saw and read what you saw and can say without a doubt it is there. Wow we can put that to rest now.

 

[CopticChristian]

You seem to forget about the rest of the Apostles. What about Paul? How many more of his writings are Scripture than Peter’s? And too, why would Paul never even mention not one time the death of Peter in Rome? If Peter was everything you say he was, it would have been one of the high points if not THE high point of Pauls writings, but yet Scripture is totally Silent here. Why?

Tell me why oh why you cried and why, why, why you lied to me…OOOOO…sorry had to do that…

youtube.com/watch?v=NT2yIfQ38xc&feature=related

Guess that the Bible is not a history book as it regards the NT, it is much more, the New reveals the Old…we are sure Peter died though…

 

[CopticChristian]

It’s not? Gosh, I can think of about a dozen times that Scripture almost shouts out the Trinity.

OK, Omar you have me convinced, just one thing…take your time show me where the Scripture shouts out the nature of the Anglican Service start to finish…the funny clothes, the crosses, the cane and all the details that I see here and what you see in your Anglican service…let me know…I am sure that Scripture just shouts it out…

youtube.com/watch?v=94qMZR-Kqf0

Omar you just make me want to shout…

youtube.com/watch?v=VL9xOLpwI0I

 

[CopticChristian]

It’s not that simple. You’re making it sound like Scripture plainly draws a map from St. Peter to the Roman Catholic church. It does nothing of the sort. Look at the history of your popes. They are carried into St. Peter’s Basillica on chariots by Vatican guards and are surrounded by a world’s fortune in gold, jewels and other precious properties. ** Peter on the other hand was a poor fisherman. He wasn’t even a bright guy. He stuck his foot in his mouth just as many times as he rightfully spoke.** That’s an enormous contrast and honestly it cannot be denied.

Now Omar you know how things go…many people are start ups and see things simply at first and then future generations benefit…Peter was an upstart, he made a good investment and now that investment has shown fruits…Steve Jobs started in a garage and look what he did…Henry VIII probably did not have it as good as Queen Elizabeth…it is just investments that grew…Remmember Joseph thrown into a pit…and then look what happened to him…Joseph started just by explaining a dream…who would have thought…

youtube.com/watch?v=51f9uEYGeKw

 

[adf417]

No wait a minute. You were talking about the Trinity. Lets stay on that. The Bible never used the word Trinity, but the truth of the trinity is all through the NT. The command of baptizing your whole household in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus being the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was GOD. Just to show a couple. Jesus saying that the father and I are one. Jesus tells the Apostles that if you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the father. There are many more. You cannot deny the Trinity is all throughout Scripture.

Greetings and blessing to you Omar,

I have been looking for a time and place to interject this thought to a brother Protestant w/ respect.

Listening to you and all other Protestant points about infallibility & authority I have come to this conclusion. While I would never put Protestants in the same boat with Jehovah’s Witnesses:bigyikes:, what you describe is clearly the formula and justification for even the (JW’s) extreme beliefs (minus the cultish acts). According to you and all arguments against CC authority I have read, it seems to me, Jehovah’s’ Witnesses, or some organization even worse, could even be the true Church. Every argument you have made points to this.

As a matter of fact I’m surprised more Protestants do not see the correlation in the vast difference between the CC and JW’s and recognizes how far the reformation has gotten out of hand.

Peace Brother!!!

 

[CopticChristian]

Greetings and blessing to you Omar,

I have been looking for a time and place to interject this thought to a brother Protestant w/ respect.

Listening to you and all other Protestant points about infallibility & authority I have come to this conclusion. While I would never put Protestants in the same boat with Jehovah’s Witnesses:bigyikes:, what you describe is clearly the formula and justification for even the (JW’s) extreme beliefs (minus the cultish acts). According to you and all arguments against CC authority I have read, it seems to me, Jehovah’s’ Witnesses, or some organization even worse, could even be the true Church. Every argument you have made points to this.

As a matter of fact I’m surprised more Protestants do not see the correlation in the vast difference between the CC and JW’s and recognizes how far the reformation has gotten out of hand.

Peace Brother!!!

Here is what Augustine says in a small treatise…“In things not seen”…if anyone wants a copy I will email it to you…it is pretty cool…he argues that the works of God can be seen…First he points out that something we believe cannot be seen and then goes on to speak of Christ and his work.

We therefore, that we may refute these, who seem to themselves through pru¬dence to be unwilling to believe what they cannot see, although we are not able to show unto human sight those divine things which we believe, yet do show unto human minds tnat even those things which are not seen are to be believed.

Then he points out that we cannot see the Will of our friends, yet we can see the results of their actions and goes on to conlcude this…

. But as the wills of friends, which are not seen, are believed through tokens which are seen; thus the Church, which is now seen, is of all things which are not seen, but which are shown forth in those writings wherein itself also is foretold, an index of the past, and a herald of the future. Because both things past, which cannot now be seen, and things present which cannot be seen all of them, at the time at which they were foretold, no one of these could then be seen. There¬fore, since they have begun to come to pass as they were foretold, from those things which have come to pass unto those which are com¬ing to pass, those things which were foretold concerning Christ and the Church have run on in an ordered series: unto which series these pertain concerning the day of Judg¬ment, concerning the resurrection of the dead, concerning the eternal damnation of the un¬godly with the devil, and concerning the eternal recompense of the godly with Christ, things which, foretold in like manner, are yet to come. If they suspect this, let them examine carefully the copies’ of our enemies the Jews. There let them read those things of which we have made mention, foretold concerning Christ in Whom we believe, and the Church whom we discern from the toilsome be¬ginning of faith even unto the eternal blessed¬ness of the kingdom.

and then says that what can be seen as evidence of the work of God is the Church spread all over the nations…

Thus while they were faithful even unto death for the truth, strove not by returning evil, but by enduring, overcame not by killing, but by dying; thus was the world changed unto this religion, thus unto this Gospel were the hearts of mor¬tals turned, of men and women, of small and great, of learned and unlearned, of wise and foolish, of mighty and weak, of noble and ignoble, of high and low, and throughout all nations the Church shed abroad so increased, that even against the Catholic faith itself there arises not any perverse sect, any kind of error, which is found so to oppose itself to Christian truth, as that it affect not and go not about to glory in the name of Christ: which very error would not be suffered to spring up throughout the earth, were it not that the very gainsaying exercised an whole¬some discipline.

He is not speaking about the Anglican, Evangelical Free, Reformed, Baptist or the Church of what is happening now…it is just the same old Catholic Church…Who today can point to their Church and use it as a proof of the work of God…

youtube.com/watch?v=Py1r9inAmHk

 

[pablope]

Is that where you think the Anglican church today gets it form; Henry VIII?

Are you in denial of the history of the Anglican Church?

Would there be anglicans if not for Henry VIII?

 

[pablope]

It’s not that simple. You’re making it sound like Scripture plainly draws a map from St. Peter to the Roman Catholic church. It does nothing of the sort. Look at the history of your popes. They are carried into St. Peter’s Basillica on chariots by Vatican guards and are surrounded by a world’s fortune in gold, jewels and other precious properties. .

It looks like you are running out of something reasonable to say…and you resort to stuff like this?
Only someone very anti-Catholic would even bring something like this…aka…the SDAs or the Jws…so you are now taking a playbook from them?

And in another post…you stated you are not into bashing Catholics?

Peter on the other hand was a poor fisherman. He wasn’t even a bright guy. He stuck his foot in his mouth just as many times as he rightfully spoke. That’s an enormous contrast and honestly it cannot be denied

But God does not look for the brightest guy…he looks for the most appropriate guy. And you know more than God?

 

[pablope]

Truth is in the inherant Word of God. I didn’t wish to go here but you seemingly wish to paint a picture of perfect succession which isn’t true at all. The popes of the middle ages were anything but. At one time a pope ordered Joan of Arc to be burned at the stake because he deemed her teachings to be against Scripture, at a later date another pope deemed the decision to be error and she is now a saint of the church. How can this be if popes are infallible?? There was even a pope who tried to sell the papacy. Come on.

 

[pablope]

Nicea325;8813871:

Absolutely true. But the RCC has rejected some of those teachings. St. Jerome recommended that the Apocrypha not be included with the OT in the Latin Vulgate. .

Here is what you do not see…Jerome expressed his opinion. But when Pope Damasus proclaimed what is to be in the Canon, Jerome followed and he was even commissioned to translate the writings in Latin.

Here is my challenge to you…show me a writing of Jerome where he opposes the Pope’s proclamation on the Bible canon?

Here is another thing you do not see…jereome does not separate himself from the Church…and does not establish his own religion…after the pope’s decision…and now, compare this with Henry VIII.

Rome did not concur.

Rome need to concur with what? Why does the pope need to concur? When Peter made the decision, after the revelation to him, about doing away with circumcision for the Gentiles…did he concur with anybody? Or is it he made the proclamation and everybody followed?

Bernard and many others rejected the notion of the Immaculate Conception. Here again, Rome didn’t give those consideration

In the end, did Bernard follow and obey the Pope after the decision? Or did Bernard rebel and founded his own religion, like Henry VIII? or Luther?