History of the Roman Catholic Church

[Mary61]

In the year 33, Jesus established the Catholic Church.

In 1517, Martin Luther established the Lutheran church.
In 1534, Henry V1111 established the Anglican church.
In 1555, John Calvin established the Calvinist church.
In 1560, John Knox established the Presbyterian church.
In 1582, came the Congregationalist church by Robert Brown
In 1609, it was the Baptist Church by John Smyth.
In 1739, John & Charles Wesley gave us the Methodist church
1789, Episcopalians by Samuel Seabury
1800, United Brethren by Philip Otterbein & Martin Boehm.
1827, Disciples of Christ/Thomas & Alexander Campbell.
1830, Mormons/Joseph Smith
1865, Salvation Army/William Booth
1874, Jehovah’s Witness/Charles Taze Russell
1879, Christian Science/Mary Baker Eddy
1917, Four-Square/Aimee Semple McPherson
1965, Calvary Chapel/Chuck Smith
1972, Harvest Christian/Greg Laurie
1982, Saddleback Church/Rick Warren

Anyone can start a church but, the church I want to belong to is the one started by Jesus Himself. Which church do you belong to?

 

[bobregan]

Note that this says all Scripture, and does not say Scripture is all. BIG difference. Catholics believe 2 Timothy 3:16 as Saint Paul wrote it - not as it was later twisted by those who claim it somehow proves “sola scriptura”.

First, it was written by Paul, who advised the early Church to retain both the epistles as well as the Apostolic Tradition that he and the Apostles handed on. Sola scriptura spits in Saint Paul’s face in this regard.

Tell me what this means:

2 Thessalonians 2:15 (King James Version) “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”

Christ established His Church not on “sola scriptura”, but on Apostles who were lead by the Holy Spirit.

To piggyback on this, I recently heard a great quote, that “Scripture is nothing more than oral Tradition that has been written down.”

Apstolic succession is important in determining a Church. The following link is actually from an Episcopalean, but neatly discusses Apostolic succession from the time of the Apostle. The Catholic Church can show Apostolic succession:

georgiachurch.org/scriptorum/succesion/ApostolicSuccession.pdf

 

[JLFuller]

My first thread on this particular forum was “Hisotry of Islam”, which was a challenge to all Muslims to provide historical facts that Islam existed before Muhammad. Every Muslim that posted under my forum failed to do so, therefore, I insist a challenge now to any protestant. Name your denomination, and we will see if your “church” predates the Universal Church. Now, this is what I have to offer for my denomination:

"As the apostles of Jesus Christ spread the Gospel, they provided the beginning structure for the early Christian Church. It is impossible to separate the initial stages of the Roman Catholic church from that of the early Christian church.

After Jesus died, Simon Peter, one of Jesus’ disciples, became a strong leader in the Jewish Christian movement. Later James, most likely Jesus’ brethren, took over leadership. These followers of Christ viewed themselves as a reform movement within Judaism yet they continued to follow many of the Jewish laws.

At this time Saul, originally one of the strongest persecutors of the early Jewish Christians, had a blinding vision of Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus, and became a Christian. Adopting the name Paul, he became the greatest evangelist of the early Christian church. Paul’s ministry, also called Pauline Christianity, was directed mainly to Gentiles rather than Jews. In subtle ways, the early church was already becoming divided.

Another belief system at this time was Gnostic Christianity, which taught that Jesus was a spirit being, sent by God to impart knowledge to humans so that they could escape the miseries of life on earth.

In addition to Gnostic, Jewish, and and Pauline Christianity, there were already many other versions of Christianity being taught. After the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the Jewish Christian movement was scattered. Pauline and Gnostic Christianity were left as the dominant groups.

The Roman Empire legally recognized Pauline Christianity as a valid religion in 313 AD. Later in that century, in 380 AD, Roman Catholicism became the official religion of the Roman Empire. During the following 1000 years, Catholics were the only people recognized as Christians.

In 1054 AD, a formal split occurred between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. This division remains in effect today.

The next major division occurred in the 16th century with the Protestant Reformation.

Those who remained faithful to Roman Catholicism believed that the central regulation of doctrine by church leaders was necessary to prevent confusion and division within the church and corruption of its beliefs."

source: christianity.about.com/od/denominations/a/catholichistory.htm​

Okay now, it is your turn either to provide facts for your church, or disprove what I just claimed. So let us make this very simple and clear, if you fail to do anything I asked for, The Roman Catholic Church is the church Jesus Christ established.

and remember one thing:

people lie, history dosen`t:thumbsup:

Read Misquoting Jesus if you want to know where Catholicsm comes from. It isn’t Christ.

 

[brkn1]

To piggyback on this, I recently heard a great quote, that “Scripture is nothing more than oral Tradition that has been written down.”

That is a sad quote.
The Lord Jesus Christ often pointed to that “nothing more than” the written Word of God, when He explained or defended God’s Truth. Jesus distinguished God’s Written Word from tradition. He condemned the idea of tradition over God’s Word.

Tradition is NOT Scripture.
Tradition often goes against Scripture. Tradition has no business being called equal to (or even superior to) Scripture.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Living Word of God.
The Bible is the written Word of God.
Tradition is man’s words and ideas and has no business ever being called Scripture.

 

[bobregan]

That is a sad quote.
The Lord Jesus Christ often pointed to that “nothing more than” the written Word of God, when He explained or defended God’s Truth. Jesus distinguished God’s Written Word from tradition. He condemned the idea of tradition over God’s Word.

Tradition is NOT Scripture.
Tradition often goes against Scripture. Tradition has no business being called equal to (or even superior to) Scripture.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Living Word of God.
The Bible is the written Word of God.
Tradition is man’s words and ideas and has no business ever being called Scripture.

Jesus (orally) taught the Apostles.

The Apostle’s (orally) then taught others.

What was transmitted here (orally) concerning the life and teachings of Christ from approximately 10-60 years after Christ’s Ressurection was then written down (the Gospels).

What’s the problem here?

 

[brkn1]

Jesus (orally) taught the Apostles.

The Apostle’s (orally) then taught others.

What was transmitted here (orally) concerning the life and teachings of Christ from approximately 10-60 years after Christ’s Ressurection was then written down (the Gospels).

What’s the problem here?

I was simply pointing out that there was a difference between the Word of God and man’s traditions. It does not matter if they are presented orally or written down. There is a difference and it is a mistake to treat them as if they are the same thing.

 

[Hisalone]

Jesus (orally) taught the Apostles.

The Apostle’s (orally) then taught others.

What was transmitted here (orally) concerning the life and teachings of Christ from approximately 10-60 years after Christ’s Ressurection was then written down (the Gospels).

What’s the problem here?

Scripture is the word of God tradition isnt.

 

[bobregan]

I was simply pointing out that there was a difference between the Word of God and man’s traditions. It does not matter if they are presented orally or written down. There is a difference and it is a mistake to treat them as if they are the same thing.

I agree. Any tradition (small “t”) that does not lead one to Christ is errant. Any Tradition (capital “T”) that leads someone further to Christ is good.

 

[Hisalone]

That is a sad quote.
The Lord Jesus Christ often pointed to that “nothing more than” the written Word of God, when He explained or defended God’s Truth. Jesus distinguished God’s Written Word from tradition. He condemned the idea of tradition over God’s Word.

Tradition is NOT Scripture.
Tradition often goes against Scripture. Tradition has no business being called equal to (or even superior to) Scripture.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Living Word of God.
The Bible is the written Word of God.
Tradition is man’s words and ideas and has no business ever being called Scripture.

Yes I agree he demeans scripture and doesnt even realize it.

 

[bobregan]

Scripture is the word of God tradition isnt.

Paul told us to “hold on to our Traditions”…what was he speaking of?

 

[Hisalone]

Paul told us to “hold on to our Traditions”…what was he speaking of?

Tradition does not have the same authority as scripture.
The word of God is Gods word to us, tradition is not.

 

[bobregan]

Tradition does not have the same authority as scripture.
The word of God is Gods word to us, tradition is not.

Then once again, before scripture was written, the Word was transmitted orally. Christ taught orally, He didn’t walk around handing out Bibles. He also adhered to Jewish Traditions (Passover).

Scripture speaks of Tradition. No where in the Bible does it mention use only the Bible, or that Tradition is subservient to the Written word. No where is sola scriptura proclaimed.

Where do you get yor authority to proclaim this concerning Scripture? What makes you correct, and the Catholic Church wrong? Are you part of the original Church that put the Canon of Scripture together 1600 years ago?

 

[LDSGuy]

they don’t understand that “traditions of men” does not equal the Sacred Tradition of Catholics.

 

[Quarles47]

Read Misquoting Jesus if you want to know where Catholicsm comes from. It isn’t Christ.

How so very wrong you are.:sad_yes:

 

[bobregan]

Yes I agree he demeans scripture and doesnt even realize it.

There is Catholic Traditions that Protestants adhere to and don’t even realize it. Do you go to Church on Sundays? do you believe that Sunday is the Lord’s day?

Well guess what…that Tradition was started by the Catholic church. Jews observe(d) Saturday as the Sabbath.

Guess who chose the canon of Scripture for the Bible? The Catholic Church. Another Catholic Tradition. If you believe the New Testament is the Word of God, thank the Catholic Church.

 

[bobregan]

What I find on all these threads is that many Proestants come on these threads without any real knowlege of Catholicism at all. Only predjudices from untrue sources that are not Catholic. I see so many errors and fallacies on Catholicism that it’s staggering.

DO YOUR HOMEWORK, PLEASE! Read and study actual, truthful catholic teaching, then post your thoughts. It takes time, but is worth it.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Jesus distinguished God’s Written Word from tradition. He condemned the idea of tradition over God’s Word.

Can you point that out to me in Scripture??

Tradition is NOT Scripture.
Tradition often goes against Scripture. Tradition has no business being called equal to (or even superior to) Scripture.

That’s nonsense. Do you suppose Moses wrote the entire Torah? If you do, where does it say that? Was he present in the garden of Eden? Was he on the ark with Noah? Do you suppose all the books of the Old Testament were written on the spot? Or recorded on video? Most of what was written in the OT was handed down verbally from generation to generation. The actual writers saw very little.if anything, of what they wrote about.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Living Word of God.
The Bible is the written Word of God.
Tradition is man’s words and ideas and has no business ever being called Scripture.

It has no business being called Scripture because Scripture means something written. That doesn’t mean Tradition isn’t inspired by God, which it is.

 

[Benjamin8o8]

There is Catholic Traditions that Protestants adhere to and don’t even realize it. Do you go to Church on Sundays? do you believe that Sunday is the Lord’s day?

Well guess what…that Tradition was started by the Catholic church. Jews observe(d) Saturday as the Sabbath.

Guess who chose the canon of Scripture for the Bible? The Catholic Church. Another Catholic Tradition. If you believe the New Testament is the Word of God, thank the Catholic Church.

AMEN BROTHER…AMEN!

This is the HISTORY of the Catholic Church.

God Bless us all.

 

[brkn1]

Can you point that out to me in Scripture??

Jesus described the Pharisees’ use of tradition to get around God’s commandment to honor one’s parents: “…Thus have ye made the commandments of God of none effect by your traditions.” (Matthew 15:6)
(Matthew 15:9) further defines the result of those who hold to man’s traditions being equal to God’s Word, when Jesus says: “But in vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”

That’s nonsense. Do you suppose Moses wrote the entire Torah? If you do, where does it say that? Was he present in the garden of Eden? Was he on the ark with Noah? Do you suppose all the books of the Old Testament were written on the spot? Or recorded on video? Most of what was written in the OT was handed down verbally from generation to generation. The actual writers saw very little.if anything, of what they wrote about.
It has no business being called Scripture because Scripture means something written. That doesn’t mean Tradition isn’t inspired by God, which it is.

I use Scripture as being the same as saying God’s Word, without much concern about whether it is actually written or not.

I see that you have distinguished between Scripture and Tradition in your last two sentences. Your implied claim that they are both equally inspired by God is something that you could not prove by Scripture. If God inspired it, it would be God’s Word, not man’s “Tradition”.

The original sin of Adam and Eve had to do with their not believing and obeying God’s Word (commandment). God values that belief and obedience to His Word above all else.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Jesus described the Pharisees’ use of tradition to get around God’s commandment to honor one’s parents: “…Thus have ye made the commandments of God of none effect by your traditions.” (Matthew 15:6)
(Matthew 15:9) further defines the result of those who hold to man’s traditions being equal to God’s Word, when Jesus says: “But in vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”

Neither of those citations from the Bible support your contention that Jesus condemned Tradition. In Mt. 15:6 He is means the negation of the commandments by the false traditions of the Pharisees. False traditions abound in the history of Christianity, most notable the traditions of protestantism, which are just about all false.

In Mt. 15:9 Jesus is speaking of man’s traditions and I will agree with you they are not the equal to the written Word.

I use Scripture as being the same as saying God’s Word, without much concern about whether it is actually written or not.

I’m not sure you’re clear about what tradition is. Saying you’re not concerned whether God’s word is actually written or not seems to say you accept that God’s word can be unwritten, which is what Sacred Traditon is – God’s Word unwritten, passed from generation to generation by the Holy Spirit.

I see that you have distinguished between Scripture and Tradition in your last two sentences. Your implied claim that they are both equally inspired by God is something that you could not prove by Scripture. If God inspired it, it would be God’s Word, not man’s “Tradition”.

Well, that’s the point – it is God’s Word and I can prove it by Scripture. Paul admonished his followers to hold to ‘our’ traditions. That’s in Scripture

The original sin of Adam and Eve had to do with their not believing and obeying God’s Word (commandment). God values that belief and obedience to His Word above all else.

I agree with you, but was the Word Adam and Eve disobeyed written down anywhere? No. God spoke it to them, proving the Word of God does not necessarily have to be written.