If I lived circa 170 AD......

[joe370]

In 33 AD you would most likely belong to your local synagogue.

Hey Mike, so If had lived circa 170 AD I would not have belonged to the same catholic church that these leaders belonged to, and by the way, Ignatius and Polycarp were both direct disciples of the apostle John?

Ignatius of Antioch:

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains *. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” *(Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).

The Martyrdom of Polycarp

“And of the elect, he was one indeed, the wonderful martyr Polycarp, who in our days was an apostolic and prophetic teacher, bishop of the Catholic Church in Smyrna. For every word which came forth from his mouth was fulfilled and will be fulfilled” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 16:2 [A.D. 155]).

The Muratorian Canon

"Besides these [letters of Paul] there is one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy, in affection and love, but nevertheless regarded as holy in the Catholic Church, in the ordering of churchly discipline. There is also one [letter] to the Laodiceans and another to the Alexandrians, forged under the name of Paul, in regard to the heresy of Marcion, and there are several others which cannot be received by the Church, for it is not suitable that gall be mixed with honey. The epistle of Jude, indeed, and the two ascribed to John are received by the Catholic Church (Muratorian fragment [A.D. 177]).

Tertullian

“Where was [the heretic] Marcion, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long agoóin the reign of Antonius for the most part and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherius, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 30 [A.D. 200]).

Cyprian of Carthage

“They alone have remained outside [the Church] who, were they within, would have to be ejected.
. . . There [in John 6:68ñ69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest, and the flock clinging to their shepherd in the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishops; and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priest of God, believing that they are secretly in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and catholic, is not split or divided, but is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere to one another” (Letters 66[67]:8 [A.D. 253]).

 

[Bluegoat]

Hey Joe,

You know that the use of the term “Catholic Church” is just not, in itself, anargument of any kind? Like, if my name is Michael Jackson, that does not make me the King of Pop, whatever I might claim or believe. And as it happens, the Orthodox also claim the title Catholic. (By the way, do you consider that since the Catholic Church is not the Orthodox Church, they are not orthodox?)

Your OP is worded in such a way that it gives only two options - either the modern day Catholic Church corresponds exactly to the Early Church, or modern day Protestant ones do. There are in fact other possibilities - it could be neither, or even both.

In any case, if you want people to make a serious guess, please tell us where you are living in 170AD.

 

[joe370]

Hey Bluegoat…

Bluegoat;7270764]Hey Joe,

You know that the use of the term “Catholic Church” is just not, in itself, anargument of any kind? Like, if my name is Michael Jackson, that does not make me the King of Pop, whatever I might claim or believe. And as it happens, the Orthodox also claim the title Catholic. (By the way, do you consider that since the Catholic Church is not the Orthodox Church, they are not orthodox?)

I consider both the CC and the OC to be both catholic and orthodox.

Your OP is worded in such a way that it gives only two options - either the modern day Catholic Church corresponds exactly to the Early Church, or modern day Protestant ones do. There are in fact other possibilities - it could be neither, or even both.

In any case, if you want people to make a serious guess, please tell us where you are living in 170AD?

If had lived circa 170 AD I guess I would have belonged to the same catholic church that these leaders belonged to, unless there was another separate church that existed alongside the CC, and by the way, Ignatius and Polycarp were both direct disciples of the apostle John, which means, to me anyway, that I would have belonged to the same church the apostles belonged to?

Ignatius of Antioch:

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains *. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).

The Martyrdom of Polycarp

“And of the elect, he was one indeed, the wonderful martyr Polycarp, who in our days was an apostolic and prophetic teacher, bishop of the Catholic Church in Smyrna. For every word which came forth from his mouth was fulfilled and will be fulfilled” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 16:2 [A.D. 155]).

The Muratorian Canon

"Besides these [letters of Paul] there is one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy, in affection and love, but nevertheless regarded as holy in the Catholic Church, in the ordering of churchly discipline. There is also one [letter] to the Laodiceans and another to the Alexandrians, forged under the name of Paul, in regard to the heresy of Marcion, and there are several others which cannot be received by the Church, for it is not suitable that gall be mixed with honey. The epistle of Jude, indeed, and the two ascribed to John are received by the Catholic Church (Muratorian fragment [A.D. 177]).

Tertullian

“Where was [the heretic] Marcion, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long agoóin the reign of Antonius for the most part and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherius, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 30 [A.D. 200]).

Cyprian of Carthage

“They alone have remained outside [the Church] who, were they within, would have to be ejected.
. . . There [in John 6:68ñ69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest, and the flock clinging to their shepherd in the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishops; and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priest of God, believing that they are secretly in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and catholic, is not split or divided, but is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere to one another” (Letters 66[67]:8 [A.D. 253]).*

 

[Bluegoat]

If you know the answer, and are not really interested in what people think, then don’t ask.

It isn’t possible for both the CC and the EOC to be completely orthodox and completely catholic. Even if we allow for the possibility of schism in the Church, they have mutually exclusive truth claims.

 

[joe370]

=Bluegoat;7270843]If you know the answer, and are not really interested in what people think, then don’t ask.

What makes you think that I am not interested? I am interested in what others think, and that is why I asked.

It isn’t possible for both the CC and the EOC to be completely orthodox and completely catholic.

Well, unlike every Protestant Church I cannot give you the name of the man that founded the EOC or the CC. Both churches can trace their lineage all the way back to the Jesus, but I know that probably doesn’t matter to you.

Even if we allow for the possibility of schism in the Church, they have mutually exclusive truth claims.

That is true. Perhaps you could PM me a detailed list (If you get the time) - of those mutually exclusive truth claims. I enjoy learning. I know of only a few.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Hey Mike, so If had lived circa 170 AD I would not have belonged to the same catholic church that these leaders belonged to, and by the way, Ignatius and Polycarp were both direct disciples of the apostle John?

Ignatius of Antioch:

“Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he ordains *. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church” *(Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 [A.D. 110]).

The Martyrdom of Polycarp

“And of the elect, he was one indeed, the wonderful martyr Polycarp, who in our days was an apostolic and prophetic teacher, bishop of the Catholic Church in Smyrna. For every word which came forth from his mouth was fulfilled and will be fulfilled” (Martyrdom of Polycarp 16:2 [A.D. 155]).

The Muratorian Canon

"Besides these [letters of Paul] there is one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy, in affection and love, but nevertheless regarded as holy in the Catholic Church, in the ordering of churchly discipline. There is also one [letter] to the Laodiceans and another to the Alexandrians, forged under the name of Paul, in regard to the heresy of Marcion, and there are several others which cannot be received by the Church, for it is not suitable that gall be mixed with honey. The epistle of Jude, indeed, and the two ascribed to John are received by the Catholic Church (Muratorian fragment [A.D. 177]).

Tertullian

“Where was [the heretic] Marcion, that shipmaster of Pontus, the zealous student of Stoicism? Where was Valentinus, the disciple of Platonism? For it is evident that those men lived not so long agoóin the reign of Antonius for the most part and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherius, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled” (Demurrer Against the Heretics 30 [A.D. 200]).

Cyprian of Carthage

“They alone have remained outside [the Church] who, were they within, would have to be ejected.
. . . There [in John 6:68ñ69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest, and the flock clinging to their shepherd in the Church. You ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishops; and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priest of God, believing that they are secretly in communion with certain individuals. For the Church, which is one and catholic, is not split or divided, but is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere to one another” (Letters 66[67]:8 [A.D. 253]).

That’s different, you changed the date from 170AD to 33AD.

 

[joe370]

That’s different, you changed the date from 170AD to 33AD.

Mike, I didn’t mention 33 AD; It was AD 170. The dates were 110 AD, 177 AD 200 AD and 253 AD. Mike, if I had lived circa 110 AD, or 177 AD or 200 AD or 253 AD, to which church would I belong? It seems logical that I would want to belong to the same church to which Ignatius and Polycarp (disciples of John the apostle) - belonged; does it?

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Mike, I didn’t mention 33 AD; It was AD 170. The dates were 110 AD, 177 AD 200 AD and 253 AD. Mike, if I had lived circa 110 AD, or 177 AD or 200 AD or 253 AD, to which church would I belong? It seems logical that I would want to belong to the same church to which Ignatius and Polycarp (disciples of John the apostle) - belonged; does it?

Yes if you belonged to the church of either Ignatius or Polycarp then you would belong to the Orthodox Church.

 

[joe370]

Yes if you belonged to the church of either Ignatius or Polycarp then you would belong to the Orthodox Church.

True, but Ignatius and Polycarp, disciples of the apostle John, referred to the orthodox church as the catholic church - right?

 

[Mikeoffaith]

True, but Ignatius and Polycarp, disciples of the apostle John, referred to the orthodox church as the catholic church - right?

I believe Ignatius may have been the first to call the Orthodox church catholic, but I can’t say for sure about Polycarp. I’m not as well versed on Polycarp’s writings.

 

[Bluegoat]

I believe Ignatius may have been the first to call the Orthodox church catholic, but I can’t say for sure about Polycarp. I’m not as well versed on Polycarp’s writings.

Many Orthodox call their themselves the Orthodox Catholic Church. But really, they can call themselves late for dinner, the question is whether they are continuous with the early Church.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Many Orthodox call their themselves the Orthodox Catholic Church. But really, they can call themselves late for dinner, the question is whether they are continuous with the early Church.

And that’s my point, the same can be said of them all.

 

[Nicea325]

Yes if you belonged to the church of either Ignatius or Polycarp then you would belong to the Orthodox Church.

Are you claiming those two men belonged to the current day “Orthodox” Church? If are you then it is wrong,because as I have asked you,show us the historical records the early church was called Orthodox? Jesus Church is orthodox in doctrine,but universal (church).

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Are you claiming those two men belonged to the current day “Orthodox” Church? If are you then it is wrong,because as I have asked you,show us the historical records the early church was called Orthodox? Jesus Church is orthodox in doctrine,but universal (church).

Names aren’t important. The fact remains that the successor of church that they belonged to is the Orthodox church. Just because you stick catholic in the name doesn’t make it more or less the church that existed in 170AD.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I can vouch for Bluegoat having known her long enough in this forum. She is not Michael Jackson!

Hey Joe,

You know that the use of the term “Catholic Church” is just not, in itself, anargument of any kind? Like, if my name is Michael Jackson, that does not make me the King of Pop, whatever I might claim or believe. And as it happens, the Orthodox also claim the title Catholic. (By the way, do you consider that since the Catholic Church is not the Orthodox Church, they are not orthodox?)

Your OP is worded in such a way that it gives only two options - either the modern day Catholic Church corresponds exactly to the Early Church, or modern day Protestant ones do. There are in fact other possibilities - it could be neither, or even both.

In any case, if you want people to make a serious guess, please tell us where you are living in 170AD.

 

[HaYishai]

Most of what you posting is true quotes .However If I had lived in 170AD. I would have most likely been Catholic . However aren’t you overlooking the fact that Jesus was a Jew and all his diciples except possibly Luke were also Jews. Jesus taught Torah not the new Testament. You Gentleman need to get back to basics. The bottom line is christianity has Jewish roots. Shouldn’t you be searching those?

 

[KathleenGee]

Agree…

Check out Hebrewcatholic.org, am an associate with them…also the Byzantine Church was the culture of Jerusalem at the time of the Arab conquest…The Church of St. Mary Major extended from the South of Jerusalem up to the North to connect to the Church there.

There were also heretical groups present…always will be, those who primarily denied the Eucharist, the Apostolic faith.

I look at the majority of posts here…some will deny early Church history irregardless…but it is an area of dire need of indepth studies.

I was listening to a former Protestant minister and he said the concept of early Christian history the Protestants hold is quite different from the actual…Alot to study…I think in time studying objective early Christian history will reunite alot of Christians.

 

[HaYishai]

Thank You for the Hebrew Catholic Link.
There is much of interest there.
i