Who founded your denomination?????

[Kevan]

ralphinal:

Good questions. If one took the time to read all of the Catholic Church’s documents from the earliest time until now, you would have what the “Church” teaches.

I certainly understand the impracticality of such an approach. But I wonder if there’s an indisputable definition of “all of the Catholic Church’s documents” which would distinguish them from “all of the documents issued by mere members of the Catholic Church”?

We also understand that when the pope speaks on matters of faith and morals, and only on faith and morals, he is also protected from teaching heresy.

Offhand, does anyone know how many times some pope has done this? I have heard that it has only happened a few times in the past, oh, 2,000 years or so. Out of 264 popes other than Peter, have practically all of them refrained from speaking about faith and morals? And wouldn’t that mean that the rest of what they did and said would be excused from the allegation that “The Church” did or said it?

If you took the time to read all of the teachings including papal documents, you will see that there has never been one case of a contridiction to the established teachings of the Curch.

Something tells me that you must not have worded that quite aright. Isn’t a papal bull a papal document? The papal indulgences of Julius and Leo were proclaimed by (you guessed it) papal bulls.

In fact, when doing that, it is easy to tell when it is the Church verses individuals.

That’s my very fear. I’m wondering if the bad stuff automatically gets classified as “individuals” and the good stuff is allowed to pass as “The Church.”

Not all popes we in favor of the sale of indulgences. That is like saying all Republicans were in favor of the Watergate break in.

Well, according to The Church, there can only be one pope at a time, so that observation doesn’t add to the relevant data. If Julius was selling indulgences, it helps not a bit to point out that other popes didn’t do it.

It is also incorrect to say that the sale of indulgences was a wide-spread problem in the Church. From the reading I’ve done on it, it was a very localized problem.

How far they were able to peddle them might be relative. It’s for sure that they sold them as far and wide as they could. This didn’t come from Tetzel or Albert; it came from the Holy See itself: first Julius, then Leo. They needed dough and they found a gold mine down in Purgatory.

Please understand that I’m not accusing my fellow forumizers of approving of the sale of indulgences then or today. I’m trying to figure out how and when one may say that “The Church” did or didn’t do something.

You mentioned slavery. Did “The Church” issue those condemnations which were never read publicly by the American bishops? If so, why was it “The Church” this time if it wasn’t “The Church” who announced the Jubilee Indulgences?

Seems like you really ought to say “Oh, The Church has erred lots of times, but she’s always returned to even keel and we know she always will.” This business of “I didn’t hit you, my hand did” (as we boys used to say in elementary school after punching a fellow in the arm) just looks, at this stage of the discussion, like a dog that won’t hunt.

 

[skyjumpr]

rod of iron:

If Peter did possess the keys to the kingdom, no one else could have passed them on except the one who possessed them. If no pope names his successor and ordains that successor, than the keys are not passed on and the authority goes to the grave with that man. If this is true, we must say goodbye to the authority and the church of Christ disappears from the Earth.

So by your analogy, if a King hands the keys to the kingdom onto a trusted servant, then goes off onto whatever journey he may need to be out on and the servant, who was given the keys, dies the kingdom at that point can no longer continue function as it no longer has any authority left in charge? In essence it ceases to exist.

Michael

 

[JoaoMachado]

http://www.machado-family.com/images/bunny.jpg
Still Going…

 

[Lonevoice]

Now that’s funny!!! Going and going and going…

Also, did we ever figure out what denomination ROI is(was, becoming)? Not to be rude, but it does seem odd that we can’t get an answer out of him regarding that.

Forgive me if I missed the answer somewhere.

 

[Aris]

rod of iron:

You act as if the Catholic church is the only ecclesiastical body who has had copies of the books of the Bible in their possession throughout the years. You act as if none of the other groups during the first three centuries AD had any copies of these books in their possession.

There was no other group except the Catholic Church for the first 1000 years. If there was what was the name of the group and who were its leaders at that time?

 

[Kevan]

Aris:

There was no other group except the Catholic Church for the first 1000 years. If there was what was the name of the group and who were its leaders at that time?

That is tantamount to saying that the Church successfully destroyed all dissidents. Better to say that dissidents are lost in ancient history and, therefore, we cannot say anything definite about their beliefs and practices.

 

[Kevan]

Lonevoice:

Also, did we ever figure out what denomination ROI is (was, becoming)?

By not acknowledging such an identity, he keeps the conversation on topic.

To scratch your itch, I’ll point out that Rod bears the marks of the Reorganized LDS, who happen to be the true successors to Joseph Smith. Unfortunately for them, Brigham Young was a greater talent and took market share away from them royally. So nowadays you always hear of Brigham’s group (the Mormons) but you almost never hear of Smith’s (continuing) group.

That might make you feel better. But don’t try to use the info in the discussion. I predict that Rod, being sharp, will neither confirm nor deny my guess.

 

[Aris]

Kevan:

That is tantamount to saying that the Church successfully destroyed all dissidents. Better to say that dissidents are lost in ancient history and, therefore, we cannot say anything definite about their beliefs and practices.

So there has been only one Church since the time of Christ.

 

[Lonevoice]

Well, Kevan, I thought he might be from that sect, we have a fair amount of them in the town I’m from, as a matter of fact, their church is just a block over from my mom’s house.

I always wonder why people don’t declare their affiliation from the start. It helps give perspective to the debate which is unfortunately lacking on forums in general, since body language, facial expression, etc. isn’t available.

Back when I was a Catholic-Bashing “Fundy with issues,” (not to say anyone else is, but I was…) we would use the same types of ‘techniques’ when asked about OUR affiliation during a debate with Catholics, along the lines of “it’s not important what we are, it’s whether or not YOU’RE saved that’s important, I know I’M saved, do you? etc.” and redirected the talk along OUR lines of control.

(before anyone gets in an uproar, I was referring to only MYSELF as a “fundy with issues” not anyone else on these forums .)

 

[Kevan]

Aris:

So there has been only one Church since the time of Christ.

No, quite the opposite is the truth. Your one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church has always been pestered by dissidents. If you don’t call them “churches,” then you can say there’s only been one church. Otherwise, you have to say that there has always been a plurality of churches.

It’s somewhat analogous to living in Florida and having roaches. You can kill them and kill them and kill them…but the best you can do is minimize their impact. The little buggers are always there, just waiting to take over whenever you relax.

Heretics are even mentioned by the apostles in the New Testament. It’s just plain impossible to suppose that these folks didn’t have copies of the Scriptures.

 

[rod_of_iron]

reggie:

You can’t seem to grasp the developement of the church throughout the years. After awhile, it had to evolve since the Apostles and those with direct contact with them would have died leaving the pilgram church to those who followed.

The church of Jesus Christ does not evolve. Only man-made churches evolve. The church of Jesus Christ was established perfectly on the Earth and any changing of it would make it imperfect. Evolution would be such a change which cannot be found in the church of Jesus Christ.

reggie:

The bottom line is that I know the truth, I haven’t done anything to deserve or merit it, God has graced me with it. I am not about convincing or converting you. You have obviously been exposed to the truth and choose to harden you heart against it.

Not at all. I have been exposed to the truth early on in my life, and I have openly embraced that truth. But knowing the truth, I can determine the counterfeits. From all I can see, the Catholic church is one of the counterfeits. It came to replace the true church when the true church had been driven into the wilderness. My heart is not hardened against the truth. I love the truth.

reggie:

I would like to thank you though, your debate strengthened my own faith even more. It still amazes me how God works so wonderfully. I seek and, always, He leads me to stronger faith and deepens my appreciation of the graces available to me through His Church.

Likewise, I should thank you, because your debate has strengthened my faith and convinced me even more that I am a member of the true church. You, as well as others, have shown me that joining the Catholic church ever in my life would be a big mistake and would lead me in darkness. I am thankful that I can perceive the darkness and enter not into it.

 

[rod_of_iron]

Where did the Catholic church get the idea that it could persecute anyone who did not share the same doctrines as the church did and that it could declare them to be heretics, even to the point of forming an institution like the Inquisition to hunt down these alleged heretics? Why didn’t the Catholic church just leave these so-called heretics alone? Why hunt them down even to the point of imprisonment or death? Would Jesus have supported such an institution of persecution? Surely not!

 

[nucatholic]

Kevan, your argument that we don’t have any written documentation or evidence that there were other Churches that were Christians like those of Protestantism today because the Catholic Church destroyed them is much like C.S. Lewis and his Invisible Cat in the Chair argument. If there is an invisible cat in a chair we wouldn’t be able to see it. So when we see an empty chair there is probably an invisible cat in it… Reason with me people! I’ve heard all the Protestant arguments a thousand times (and Mormon arguments too) because I was a devout non-denom evangelical for 15 years. I just pray that you can be open to the truth when you see it in the bride of Christ which is the Catholic Church. Rod of Iron, there is not a solid shred of evidence for ANYTHING in the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith was a treasure seeker who used stones like the Urim and Thummim (spelling?) to look into his little hat and try to find buried treasure. There is no evidence for any of the civilizations and happenings in the Americas that the Book of Mormon claims happened. I have personally seen at least 4 different translations of the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine and Covenants and have seen the significant changes in the wording so that it would not contradict itself along with modern “revelation.” I have had conversations with 4 missionaries and a bishop of our local ward and no one has presented any kind of truth. I read through the Book of Mormon and prayed about it honestly and knew in my heart it was wrong. How can a Church be the true Church if it claims as its main authority the Bible (Joseph Smith Translation of the KJV) which was originally canonized by the Catholic Church… truth hurts sometimes ROI and I hope it hurts enough to change. It hurt when I first learned the truth but God makes it worth while to change your life and give it to Him as part of His Catholic Church. I’ll pray for you.

 

[Aris]

Kevan:

No, quite the opposite is the truth. Your one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church has always been pestered by dissidents. If you don’t call them “churches,” then you can say there’s only been one church. Otherwise, you have to say that there has always been a plurality of churches.

No we don’t call them churches. It’s like saying they belong to a larger group that includes the Catholic Church.

There is only one group where you will find salvation, The One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church. You may find salvation outside of it but under special circumstances.

Again to the point, if what you say is true then protestant denominations can trace their origins from these groups. Please show me which groups can trace it back to these Pre-1000AD “dissident groups” you are referring to.

 

[Kevan]

Aris:

Again to the point, if what you say is true then protestant denominations can trace their origins from these groups. Please show me which groups can trace it back to these Pre-1000AD “dissident groups” you are referring to.

You aren’t reading carefully.

Rod originally said " You act as if none of the other groups during the first three centuries AD had any copies of these books in their possession." You answered “There was no other group except the Catholic Church for the first 1000 years. If there was what was the name of the group and who were its leaders at that time?.”

My reply has been to say of course there were others. Heretics are mentioned in the New Testament and in the writings of the Fathers all along. Some of them are named. And of course they had copies of the Scriptures.

Now you are challenging me to produce their names and establish a pedigree between them and some present-day sect. I hope that you didn’t change the topic deliberately. The truth is, I suggested that you correct your stance to say that such groups are “lost to history.” We do know of many groups’ names, but we don’t know where they disappeared to. (Many certainly died at the hands of Catholic persecution.) All I contend for is that (1) they existed and (2) they had copies of the Scriptures.

My allegation is that we may suppose heretics had copies of the Scriptures. Your position supposed that those groups didn’t exist (which is untenable). But hopefully you will back off from that allegation and address the question of whether or not such groups would have had copies of the Scriptures.

I can’t imagine how you would argue against such an idea, but I’m listening.

 

[rod_of_iron]

I have found 10 Early Christian theologies that are allegedly heretical. These theologies are: Sabellianism, Docetism, Monophysitism, Adoptionism, Nestorianism, Appollinarianism, Arianism, Socianism, Donatism, Pelagianism, Gnosticism, and Manicheanism. Now, I am not saying that any of these theologies are correct, but I do not believe that Catholicism is any more correct than any of these. You say that there were no other Christian groups besides Catholicism before 1000 AD, but there must have been a group for each of these theologies. Whether or not any of these other groups were right or wrong, it does not matter. I have proved that Catholicism was not the only theology and the only church that claimed to be Christian. In fact, Monophysitism is still around in the Coptic church. Manicheanism existed into the Middle Ages, where it was wiped out during the crusades. Gnosticism is still around today. Pelagianism is still shared by many liberal Christian groups. Nestorianism is still alive in Iran.

Therefore, to say that Catholicism was the only group that claimed to believe is Jesus Christ before 1000 AD is not accurate.

 

[rod_of_iron]

How about if the Catholics lay out their beliefs on the table, and I lay out the beliefs of my church on the table, and we see which church measures up the best to the church that Jesus Christ established on Earth? How long a church has continually existed on Earth does not guarantee that it is the true church or that it is free from corruption. Let’s talk about doctrines that are very important in Christianity and see how our churches measure up.

 

[JoaoMachado]

rod of iron:

How about if the Catholics lay out their beliefs on the table, and I lay out the beliefs of my church on the table, and we see which church measures up the best to the church that Jesus Christ established on Earth? How long a church has continually existed on Earth does not guarantee that it is the true church or that it is free from corruption. Let’s talk about doctrines that are very important in Christianity and see how our churches measure up.

YES it does guarantee that it is THE True Church Jesus left behind! Because He said *'I will be with you til the end of times"
*What is it to say, but that our Lord failed? Did He not say *'You are Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church"? *Notice He does not say, ok here are the keys, she is all gassed up and ready to go! The Church is the city set on a hill, that can not be hid! I asked you a question earlier in this thread, which you did not respond, and that was in regards to the Eastern Orthodox Church and how it fit into the scheme of things?

I emplor you to ask a well informed Orthodox, how their Church came about? Because the Eastern CHurch did not come from the Roman Rite. They will tell you, it was founded by the Apostles, including Peter. So ask yourself, how could two or more Churches that claim to be Apostolic, yet separate, come to believe in the same Sacraments, Baptism, same Lord, etc, with the only real major objection being, the Bishop of Rome being more than first among equals.

Did God ever abandon Israel? Why would God abandon His Church, when the most important time came, to spread the Word, the Gospel to every corner of the Earth? Did our Lord then abandon His Church, then God lied to us? Did He not say that *“The Gates of Hell will not prevail against it.” *

Every heretic comes from the Church or from other heretics, ask yourself, how did my denomination come about? Did it come from God Himself?, Did it come from the Church? (Like Luther) or did it come from ___? Or who did it come from? Our Protestant brothers Claim that the Catholic Church is “man made” isn’t that the kettle calling the pot black? Yes let’s look at the credentials of the Apostles and the Reformers.

Joao

 

[rod_of_iron]

It’s funny. When I answered the question in the topic of this thread, “Who founded your denomination?”, I responded that Jesus the Christ founded it. Instead of my response answering the question to everyone’s satisfaction, I was told that I was wrong. I just think it is funny that my response to this question is not adequate enough for everyone, but when I ask Catholics questions, they believe that their responses always answers my questions.

 

[montanaman]

It’s funny. When I answered the question in the topic of this thread, “Who founded your denomination?”, I responded that Jesus the Christ founded it. Instead of my response answering the question to everyone’s satisfaction, I was told that I was wrong. I just think it is funny that my response to this question is not adequate enough for everyone, but when I ask Catholics questions, they believe that their responses always answers my questions.

Nothing funny about that. You can claim that Jesus in some mystical way inspired whatever late-millenial pretender to say he he had the authority to start a new Church, or, you can look at Scripture, the Church Fathers, and the historical record to see that Christ only founded one Church 2000 years ago.

I can’t wait to see the sophistry fly now!