Was Jesus a Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_II
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Charlemagne_II

Guest
I think Jesus was a Catholic since it’s clear he was not a Protestant. To have been a Protestant would mean he was protesting the universal Church he intended to build.

So then the question is, why do Protestants say the Catholic Church was a rebellion against Christ? When did it begin to revolt, from the Protestant point of view? If Protestants are sincere about this conviction, they must have some evidence that the Church went off the tracks that Christ built for it. When would that be? What century? What Council? What doctrines reveal that the Church became heretical from the Protestant view?

Any Protestant takers? 🙂
 
Jesus was born as a Jew but He is a Catholic because the apostolic Church is His mystical Body which nourishes His followers with the Bread of Life and the Cup of Salvation.
 
There were no protestants until Martin Luther and John Calvin, and Wesley came along in the 15th or 16th century.

Jesus was baptised, and he gave Himself Holy Communion, and He was the first priest, and He definitely believes in the communion of saints, and He was the founder of the Catholic Church. He was a Jew who reformed His faith to defintely become Catholic.

Jews do not believe the messiah has come, and He definitely believed that. Jews do not get baptised, and they don’t believe in Communion, confessiom. Jesus believes all these things.
 
No Jesus was not a Catholic. Catholics are Christians. Christians are Christ followers. Christ did not follow - He was the lead.
 
He didn’t teach Protestant ideas.
Not even the King James Bible can show he did.
 
Well, then was Luther, Lutheran or was Cavin a Calvinist or was Buddha, a Buddhist… of course they are. The founders of a religion are definitely a part of that religion.
 
Jesus the God-Man gave us a universal (Catholic, not Jewish) religion to follow in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Before Jesus the Jews never even hear of the Son and the Holy Spirit. They certainly believed the messiah would come not to save all, but only the Jews. That hardly makes Jesus a follower of the Jews, and all the less so when he speaks of himself as having founded a new Covenant. “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” (Luke 22:20).

But I still want to know why the modern Protestants think they are offshoots of the early true Christianity, and that Catholicism is is just an early heresy that has never given up on itself?

What is their proof that the Church ceased to teach what Christ taught, and when did that heresy begin? What century? What doctrines? What Councils? Etc.

I have yet to meet a Protestant who can give me concrete evidence of the same that stands up to the test of historical facts.
 
Protestants make that claim because they can never get around the fact that they did exist as any sort of denomination until the middle ages. They are trying to give themselves legitimacy by claiming that they have their root hundreds of years before their reformation.

It is totally bogus and they know it,. They just refuse to admit it. IF they did then they would be forced to achknowledge that the Catholic Church has it right and they are up the creek without a paddle.

They basically have no history prior to the 1500’s. So they want to make up some song and dance about how the Church lasped into heresy even though Jesus specifically says His Chruch will endure until the end of time, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.

Their claim that the Church deviated, directly goes against the very scriptures that they believe are sacro-sanct… go figure ?
 
I think a good question is asking when did the church become Roman Catholic? In my personal study of the early church I discovered that the early christians met in groups in their homes. The disciples would travel to these groups for teaching. Often lingering for a time,living in private homes and working in the area. It is written that Paul did this. They were Jewish-so logically, He was Jewish as there was no “catholic” labelled church. Early church history is very interesting, there are may free books and audios concerning this period listed at Project Gutenberg and Librivox. Try " St. Eusibius’ s History of the Early Church" I found it at Libirvox in audio-it is beautifully told and written.
Written about 300 A.D. [BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]
 
wcknight said:
Well, then was Luther, Lutheran or was Cavin a Calvinist or was Buddha, a Buddhist… of course they are. The founders of a religion are definitely a part of that religion.
Click to expand...
I doubt Luther would have considered himself a Lutheran, nor Calvin a Calvinist. They’d probably have thought of themselves as reformers of the Christian church. Just like John Wesley never, ever said he was a Methodist, but considered himself an Anglican. Buddha wasn’t a Buddhist, he was a Vedic Brahminist/Hindu.
 
In those early days of the Church, the name " Catholic" was not yet in use. There was just the one Church and known as such.
 
Jesus Christ is Catholic. And Catholics are adopted, ingrafted Jews. You can’t be heir to the New & Eternal Covenant unless you are baptized, initiated, into Christ’s family, and that includes Baptism of the desire. Adoption in the ancient world was 100% sonship, not some second-class status. This is why the Virgin Mary accepted as the “handmaid” of the Lord because a handmaid’s child had 100% inalienable sonship, full heir. This is why Sarah changed the status of her “handmaid” to “servant” because she wanted to throw her and her son out. God didn’t honor this change, however, although He said Hagar’s son, Ishmael, would create a large nation that was ever warlike with all men’s hands against them.

Father William G. Most loved to ask, “Why was Jesus Jewish?” Jesus was Jewish because His mother was Jewish! This is the Virgin Mary’s role, Christ’s and our mother, as Jews account their heritage only through one’s mother. This is the Woman & Seed relation of warriors against the Father of Lies and Murder from Genesis 3:15, a grant of power and authority in a fight we must take up. This is why the Blessed Virgin is called by the Archangel Gabriel “blessed among women” not “blessed above women” as Samuel’s mother Hannah was termed. This is an inclusive status. So with Genesis 3:15 where “seed” is a collective term nicely describing the Body of Christ. We’re in it to win it. May the Lord grant us perseverance to win the race.

Christ initiated our adoption process in John with His dying breath, so it has to be of utmost importance. The Blessed Virgin’s “other children” in John’s Apocalypse 12 means Christ’s adopted brothers and sisters. That’s us, please God. The forensic, legal status of Catholics is that we are Messianic Jews, God having veiled the hearts of some Jews until at His pleasure Yeshua HaMeshiach is revealed.

copiosa.org/christology/christ_teachings.htm Fr. William G. Most
 
Well Luther followed all the teachings of himself, Buddha practiced all the beliefs of himself, and John Wesley followed all his own teaching so of course they are Lutheran, Buddhist and Methodist. IF they walk like a duck, act like a duck and quack like a duck, by golly, they ARE a DUCK !!!
 
I say He was a Jew. because there was no Christian or Catholic Church until He went back to heaven. 🤷
 
Mary was the first disciple of Christ, and the premier Apostle.

-Tim-
 
Charlemagne_II said:
I think Jesus was a Catholic since it’s clear he was not a Protestant. To have been a Protestant would mean he was protesting the universal Church he intended to build.

So then the question is, why do Protestants say the Catholic Church was a rebellion against Christ? When did it begin to revolt, from the Protestant point of view? If Protestants are sincere about this conviction, they must have some evidence that the Church went off the tracks that Christ built for it. When would that be? What century? What Council? What doctrines reveal that the Church became heretical from the Protestant view?

Any Protestant takers? 🙂
Click to expand...
I don’t think this is a philosophical question. Jesus was a Jew who founded the religion which became known as the Catholic religion about a hundred years after His death and Resurrection newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm. Let’s not start a quarrel.
 
Linus

Do you not believe that Jesus began a new covenant with **all **the human race, rather than just the Jews? That’s what Catholic means … universal. Jesus was for saving all mankind, not just the Jews. That it was not immediately called “Catholic” with an upper case C is not relevant. It’s the Church he founded, it is distinctly different from the Jewish faith in many particulars. Wouldn’t he have believed what he taught to be true before he taught it?

No need to quarrel. Just point out your facts and stand by them. That’s what apologetics is about. 😃
 
Jesus was a Jew. There’s no way Jesus could have been a Catholic, because the Catholic Church had not been founded yet. If Jesus was a Catholic, answer this.
  • Why was nothing mention in the Bible about Jesus being the first Catholic?
  • Why did the Bible portray Jesus as a Jewish rabbi?
  • Who was the Pope if Jesus was a Catholic?
  • How can God be a follower of His own Faith that worships Him?
  • How can Jesus (who was perfect) be able to fulfil the sacraments when he never married or became a Catholic priest?
If Christ was a Catholic, then He was never the Messiah, because the Messiah had to be Jewish according to the Tanahk. Jesus was Jewish and was not a Catholic, even though Jesus founded the Catholic Faith. The same way God the Father founded the Jewish Faith, but HaShem is not a Jew. He is God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top