Who started the Christian Church?

[rinnie]

I am a Protestant - and you are wrong.

Christ started the Christian Church - and although the apostle Paul was instrumental in bringing the gospel to the Gentiles - it was Peter who first preached to the Gentiles and it was Peter who first received the revelation that the dietary laws and the mosaic economy had been fulfilled by Christ - (Acts 10).

Peter was no pope - but he was one heck of an apostle.

Of course the Bible demonstrates that Paul was in every way possible equal to Peter - in influence and authority.

Keep your eyes on Jesus - and do not fall into the foolishness of exalting men; one over another . . . this is not of God.

If Peter was no Pope why did Jesus give Peter the keys to the kingdom. Why did he not give them to all of the Apostles?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

This is a question proceeding from the flesh. this is the same question the Apostles argued among themselves. Remember how Jesus responded?

Paul never taught that .

Oh yes he did. He spells it out in Galatians concerning the law:

Paul had a specific mission to the Gentiles; his goal was to bring the Gospel to the non-Jewish populations of Europe and Asia. He did not require the lost to become Jewish, get circumcised or follow the Law. He taught that salvation comes through faith in Christ only. He went on in this letter to the Galatians to point out that he had met with some of other Apostles in Antioch and it was agreed that Paul would preach to the Gentiles while Peter, James and John would evangelize among the Jews.

It was at this meeting that the “discussion” about salvation by faith alone verses the need to follow Jewish Law and customs came up. Peter and Paul did not see eye to eye. Peter was drawing away from the Gentile converts in favor of those Jewish believers who were still living by the Law of Moses. Paul said to Peter: “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?” We who are Jews by birth and not ‘Gentile sinners’ know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.” (Gal. 2:14-16)

Paul finishes chapter two by proclaiming his own understanding of the Gospel. He fully develops his theology in the Book of Romans, chapters 1-8. He clearly writes his belief that observance of the Levitical law cannot bridge the relationship gap between God and mankind. Paul asserts that only Christ, and faith in Him, can bridge that separation. To add anything more to this is to abandon one’s new freedom and return to legal obligations and slavery to the Law, to exchange life for death. In other words, it is futile to attempt reconciliation with God through human efforts.

essortment.com/all/commentaryonga_rmjy.htm

 

[bbarrick8383]

Here is the quick guide. If the Church has Orthodox in its name, it is probably not in union with Rome, such as Eastern Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox. If a Church calles itself Eastern Rite, it probably is in union with Rome. There are nearly two dozen Eastern Rite Churches in union with Rome. Depending on where you grew up, sheltered Protestant or not, you may not have encountered many of either group.

The Orthodox and the Catholic CHurch both claim to be the Church started by Jesus, and both are correct and incorrect. Both Churches WERE. However, the split that now exists was not part of the plan. It is a long, drawn out story that always ends in name calling, so I will cut to the chase. Orthodoxy denies the Supremacy and infallibilty of the Pope, and all dogmas that come from that. Catholics do not. Orthodoxy claims that all of that stuff to be innovations. Catholics do not. Both sides have early Church Fathers to call upon. Theologically, they are very similar, and in some ways indentical. The Orthodox are closer to Rome than many Protestant denominations, even though they will not always admit it.

Thank you, my readings on this forum had kind of brought me to that conclusion. Thank you for the clarification.

 

[paarsurrey]

By Mary, do you mean his mother, or do you mean Mary Magdalene?

Hi

I mean Mary the mother:

Kindly google for:Holger Kersten on grave of Mary in Murree

Final resting place of Jesus Christ - Instablogs7 Oct 2008 … Thanks Michael,Holger Kersten in his book ”Jesus Lived in India … **at Murree on the rout to Kashmir we have the grave of Mary mother **

Thanks

 

[guanophore]

:nope:

Jesus was on his way from Galilee towards India; escaping death on Cross, then Paul seized the oppurtunity and made Jesus’ teacings topsy turvy, in my opinion. Perhaps this was a clever way to avenge his animosity towards Jesus and Mary.

On his journey toward India, Jesus took along Mary and only his trusted disciples; he left Peter and Paul etc behind. They were not, in my opinion, his trusted followers.

I love Jesus and Mary as I love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks

blah, blah, blah

horses hockey

 

[guanophore]

I am a Protestant - and you are wrong.

Christ started the Christian Church - and although the apostle Paul was instrumental in bringing the gospel to the Gentiles - it was Peter who first preached to the Gentiles and it was Peter who first received the revelation that the dietary laws and the mosaic economy had been fulfilled by Christ - (Acts 10).

Of course the Bible demonstrates that Paul was in every way possible equal to Peter - in influence and authority.

Keep your eyes on Jesus - and do not fall into the foolishness of exalting men; one over another . . . this is not of God.

:clapping: :tiphat:

 

[Reuben_J]

Catholics always say that Peter was the first pope, the rock, the key holder of the Catholic Church. But what about Paul? In a way I think Paul really made Christianity what it is today. He was the one who declared all Gentiles were part of the kingdom of Israel, descendants of Abraham, just as the Jews were. He was the one who denounced the Jewish laws (such as circumcism and dietary restrictions), and told all people that they could be saved only by grace and the crucifixion of Jesus.

What do you think, both Catholics and non-Catholics? Who was most important, Peter or Paul?

I think the question is not right and should not be asked by Christians. Unless it is for the sake of childish comparison and for fun.

All saints are members of the one body in Christ and each has unique role to play. As to who is more important, the question does not arise as all are important in the eyes of the Lord.

I think Paul says it very well here:

1 Cor 12
2 You remember that, when you were pagans, you were irresistibly drawn to inarticulate heathen gods.
3 Because of that, I want to make it quite clear to you that no one who says ‘A curse on Jesus’ can be speaking in the Spirit of God, and nobody is able to say, ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit.
4 There are many different gifts, but it is always the same Spirit;
5 there are many different ways of serving, but it is always the same Lord.
6 There are many different forms of activity, but in everybody it is the same God who is at work in them all.

14 And indeed the body consists not of one member but of many.
15 If the foot were to say, ‘I am not a hand and so I do not belong to the body,’ it does not belong to the body any the less for that.
16 Or if the ear were to say, ‘I am not an eye, and so I do not belong to the body,’ that would not stop its belonging to the body.
17 If the whole body were just an eye, how would there be any hearing? If the whole body were hearing, how would there be any smelling?
18 As it is, God has put all the separate parts into the body as he chose.

Ephesan 4
4 There is one Body, one Spirit, just as one hope is the goal of your calling by God.
5 There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6 and one God and Father of all, over all, through all and within all.
7 On each one of us God’s favour has been bestowed in whatever way Christ allotted it.
8 That is why it says: He went up to the heights, took captives, he gave gifts to humanity.
9 When it says, ‘he went up’, it must mean that he had gone down to the deepest levels of the earth.
10 The one who went down is none other than the one who went up above all the heavens to fill all things.
**11 And to some, his ‘gift’ was that they should be apostles; to some prophets; to some, evangelists; to some, pastors and teachers;
12 to knit God’s holy people together for the work of service to build up the Body of Christ, **
13 until we all reach unity in faith and knowledge of the Son of God and form the perfect Man, fully mature with the fullness of Christ himself.

 

[rinnie]

While I believe it was Peter who started the Catholic Church, I don’t think there is an answer to who was more important. It’s like asking a Mother or Father what child do you like the best. My Dad always had the answer to that, he said asking someone who they liked best was like asking him which finger on your hand do you want to chop off. No matter which finger its gonna hurt. The pain would be the same. The same for a Mother or Father’s love and Christ’s love for us. You can’t choose. Love is Love. Rrmember God has no favorites. He loves us all. Just like Peter’s job on this earth was the same as Paul’s. Bringing people to know Christ. They both made Jesus very proud. Just like a child to a parent, sure they were not perfect, but what one of us is. But in the eyes of a parent they are. And no matter how they make mistakes or do well they are loved the same. Unconditional the same as God’s love for us.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I am also a protestant. Men are equal before God, but they are given authority on earth and that includes authority in the Church. We should consider men with authority unequal to men without authority, and thank Jesus Christ for wisely establishing the order that He did.

That said, I agree with Luther that the Pope should not be able to prevent the convention of an ecumenical council. Obviously Peter did not have that power.

Gabriel of 12:
Can I ask for clarification here please? What prevention of an ecumenical council?

 

[guanophore]

While I believe it was Peter who started the Catholic Church, I don’t think there is an answer to who was more important.

Peter did not start the Catholic Church. Jesus did that. He said “upon this Rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH”. Peter is one of the rocks that make up the foundation of the Church, but Jesus is the builder, and the cornerstone.

I like your analogy about the fingers. All of them are different, yet all of them have important functions. Some have abilities that others do not.

 

[rinnie]

Peter did not start the Catholic Church. Jesus did that. He said “upon this Rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH”. Peter is one of the rocks that make up the foundation of the Church, but Jesus is the builder, and the cornerstone.

I like your analogy about the fingers. All of them are different, yet all of them have important functions. Some have abilities that others do not.

Ok lets put it this way, Jesus started the Catholic Church but put Peter in charge of starting a visable Church on earth, Hows that? And he built that Church in Rome. Jesus told Peter to build it there because in those days Rome was considered to be the center of the world. How that better?

Yes, His point was and isn’t it true no matter what finger on your hand you would pick, the pain would still be the same. Isn’t that unreal, Only Papa could come up with that one,

 

[pathfinder7]

Catholics always say that Peter was the first pope, the rock, the key holder of the Catholic Church. But what about Paul? In a way I think Paul really made Christianity what it is today. He was the one who declared all Gentiles were part of the kingdom of Israel, descendants of Abraham, just as the Jews were. He was the one who denounced the Jewish laws (such as circumcism and dietary restrictions), and told all people that they could be saved only by grace and the crucifixion of Jesus.

What do you think, both Catholics and non-Catholics? Who was most important, Peter or Paul?

Paul didn’t walk with Jesus and talk with Jesus (except on the road to Damascus). Peter betrayed Jesus but had the (whatever?) to repent… Peter represents ALL of us… because we ALL betray Jesus one way or the other… Peter was the one who loved Jesus “more than these”…

Peter died like Christ only in undoubtedly a more pain ful way- upside down…

Jesus CHOSE Peter… he said “Thou art Peter and on this rock, i will build my Church.”

So to argue with that is to argue with Jesus Christ himself…

I tend to think that’s not such a good idea…

 

[guanophore]

Ok lets put it this way, Jesus started the Catholic Church but put Peter in charge of starting a visable Church on earth, Hows that? And he built that Church in Rome.

No, Jesus sent the HS to be in charge of starting a visible church on earth. The Church is built on the foundation of the Apostles and prophets. Such a foundation is not restricted to any one city.

Jesus told Peter to build it there because in those days Rome was considered to be the center of the world. How that better?

Jesus told Peter nothing of the kind. Jesus told Peter the opposite. He told Peter “Very truly, I tell you, when you were younger, you used to fasten your own belt and to go wherever you wished. But when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will fasten a belt around you and take you where you do not wish to go.” 19(He said this to indicate the kind of death by which he would glorify God.) After this he said to him, “Follow me.” John 21:18-19

Peter was in Rome against his will, because he was following Jesus. Peter was arrested for his faith, detained, and executed.

 

[rinnie]

This is what I was taught.

1 Peter 5:13 Some protestants argue against the papacy by trying to prove Peter was never in Rome. First this argument is irrelevant to whether Jesus instituted the Papacy, Secondly this verse demonstrates that Peter was in fact in Rome. Peter writes from Babylon which was a code name for Rome during these days of persecution. See for example, rev. 17:8 16:19 17:5 18:2 10, 21 which show that Babylon meant Rome. Rome was the great city of the NT period. Because Rome during this age was considered the center of the wrold, the Lord wanted his Church to be established in Rome.

And he says to him again after the resurrection feed my sheep. It is on him that he builds the church and to him that he intrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles , yet he founded a single chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the Church’s oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was but a primacy is given to Peter and made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the appostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to the oneness of Peter does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built has he still confidence that he is in the Church. This unity firmly should we hold and maintainm especially we bishops presiding in the Church in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided. Cyprian, the unity of the church, 4-5 (A. D. 251-256

 

[puzzleannie]

Catholics always say that Peter was the first pope, the rock, the key holder of the Catholic Church. But what about Paul? In a way I think Paul really made Christianity what it is today. He was the one who declared all Gentiles were part of the kingdom of Israel, descendants of Abraham, just as the Jews were. He was the one who denounced the Jewish laws (such as circumcism and dietary restrictions), and told all people that they could be saved only by grace and the crucifixion of Jesus.

What do you think, both Catholics and non-Catholics? Who was most important, Peter or Paul?

perhaps, but Peter had his vision about the gentiles and the law before Paul began his ministry, even though he had to be reminded to stick to it by his confreres. Paul himself “was all things to all men” on that issue at times, and circumcised Timothy, a Jew with a Greek father, for ministry among other Jews.

The fact is Jesus appointed Peter as the first pope and except for accounts of his actions in the early years, his own letter, the Gospel of Mark, probably written by a close colleague, and the facts of his move to Rome and martydom, we don’t have as much in the written record as we do of Paul. The written record, thankfully, is not the sole basis for our knowledge of the early Church.

Paul himself warned about such debates as who is more important, and against disunity and rebellion against Church leadership so he would be the last to endorse such a debate. He also submitted to the authority of the Church, clearly headed by Peter, in every and all aspects of his ministry. Since the Church was already existence, having been founded by Jesus with Peter as her earthly leader, before Paul had his conversion and began his ministry, obviously he did not start the Church.

What do you think, both Catholics and non-Catholics? Who was most important, Peter or Paul?

this is not the question OP posted in thread title, why did you change the nature of the debate? what is it you really want to know?

 

[rinnie]

No, Jesus sent the HS to be in charge of starting a visible church on earth. The Church is built on the foundation of the Apostles and prophets. Such a foundation is not restricted to any one city.

Jesus told Peter nothing of the kind. Jesus told Peter the opposite. He told Peter “Very truly, I tell you, when you were younger, you used to fasten your own belt and to go wherever you wished. But when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will fasten a belt around you and take you where you do not wish to go.” 19(He said this to indicate the kind of death by which he would glorify God.) After this he said to him, “Follow me.” John 21:18-19

Peter was in Rome against his will, because he was following Jesus. Peter was arrested for his faith, detained, and executed.

While I agree that the scripture that you quoted is correct, I do not agree with your understanding if it. Jesus would never take away our free will. Yes Peter was arrested, and killed but it was his choice, He loved Jesus enough to die for him. Granted he knew his fate but he also accepted it by his own free will. He could have refused it. But he accepted it knowing that pain and death would welcome him.

 

[ralphinal]

Peter chose to be in Rome. The traditional and historical proof shows that to be true. He was arrested against his will and put to death for what he taught.

Rome would not have brought a run of the mill troublemaker to Rome to put on trial and execute.

Paul requested to be brought before Ceaser. He had that right as a Roman citizen.

 

[rinnie]

I am also a protestant. Men are equal before God, but they are given authority on earth and that includes authority in the Church. We should consider men with authority unequal to men without authority, and thank Jesus Christ for wisely establishing the order that He did.

That said, I agree with Luther that the Pope should not be able to prevent the convention of an ecumenical council. Obviously Peter did not have that power.

Well I don’t like to argue but I must say I disagree with you completely. First of all I agree with Jesus and totally disagree with Luther. I do not follow luther I follow what Jesus said. Next I am either misunderstanding or something what Did the Pope do?

 

[adelore]

My answer to this question is this.

God sent Jesus to mankind to save us from our sins.

Jesus picked Peter to build the Church and feed the Sheep. Jesus gave Peter the “keys” to do this.

My other thought is this. We can discuse this all day long, but the one fact remains…Jesus said it and picked Peter and since Jesus did who are any of us do doubt Our Lord and Savior?

You can ask any Chirstian Church today what Church was first. (everyone I’ve asked all agree to the following answer.) The list of churchs include:
Baptist, Luthern, The Church of Christ, Pentalcostal, Seventh Day Adventist, several Non-Denomanational, The Church of Yahweh, Methodist, Congranational, and the list goes on.

The Catholic Church was the first Christian Church. The word Catholic meaning “Univerisal”. All Christian Churchs today have a hisotry that takes them back to the Catholic Church. (They have broken off from the Catholic Church over the years.)

Now it is very true for whatever reasons, (and each Prodesent or Orthadox) church (their history) they broke off from the Catholic Church. Each has their reasons from breaking off from the Catholic Church and then from each other forming today the many “types” of Churchs the world has.

Now the Catholic Church has been the “Oldest Church” and the Only Church that has Stood the “Test of Time.” over all these years. (you have to admit there has to be something special about that, even if your not Catholic or even if you don’t agree with all the Catholic Teachings.)

Now I’ve read on this forum board all the things said about the Catholic Church, including the “Bloody History” of it all the bad things that have happened in the Church.

First and foremost, keep in mind we can “Pick out any Religion” and we can find “People” (Pastors, Decons, members ect.) in those churchs that have all sinned…anywhere from Murder, stealing, adultry, to yes doing horrible things to children.

Yet does this mean that all “Prodesents” in what ever church it is, are all bad? Or that the Church and it’s message is all bad? Of course not.

You will find the Catholic chruch refers to all other Christian Churchs as “Seperated Brothers and Sisters”. The reason for that? Because Jesus built his first church on Peter. Peter was the Rock and Jesus chose Him to start the first worldwide Church.

 

[pathfinder7]

I am also a protestant. Men are equal before God, but they are given authority on earth and that includes authority in the Church. We should consider men with authority unequal to men without authority, and thank Jesus Christ for wisely establishing the order that He did.

That said, I agree with Luther that the Pope should not be able to prevent the convention of an ecumenical council. Obviously Peter did not have that power.

I’m must glad the Catholic Church is not a democracy. Most people, myself included, don’t have a clue about certain very important things…

so i guess it doesn’t really matter what anyone’s opinion is. Christ’s Church is the way it is and there is nothing (fortunatley ) anyone can do about it… (except God himself and the parishioners therein. frankly, i wish all the people who call themselves Catholic really were Catholic… but anyway…)