WHY do you [if you do?] think the RCC is not the One true Church founded by Christ?

[Peter_J]

Well, not quite.

If I am to respond to PJM, I will be doing it with fear and trembling because I feel tremendously inadequate. Not because I am doubting my own convictions but because I feel like an ant on the pavement about to be run over by a truck.

In the meantime I have to get ready to go to church.

I don’t know PJM, but I agree that the comparison I made isn’t perfect. For one thing, if I lived in Rome then the Pope would in fact be my bishop … whereas I don’t believe “Jesus is my Pope” is true for anyone.

 

[gazelam]

NOW COMPARE VERSE 5 & 6 TO THE COMMAND

And Jesus coming, spoke TO THEM, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [Going therefore, **TEACH YOU ALL NATIONS

baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching THEM [THE ENTIRE WORLD] to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world.

TOm the ONLY way this could and would be feasible is THROUGH Succession

GBY

Patrick

The translation I BOLDED in red is not a good choice of words to convey what is in the original Greek.

The Greek says that Christ will be with those disciples until the end of the “aiōnos” or “αἰῶνος”

See biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/28-20.htm.

This Greek word “αἰῶνος” is defined as “an age, a cycle (of time), especially of the present age as contrasted with the future age, and of one of a series of ages stretching to infinity”.

See biblehub.com/greek/165.htm.

So Christ is telling his disciples that He would be with them until the end of that period of time, or that “age” that they were in then. It doesn’t mean there weren’t additional “ages” to follow afterward before Christ returns to the Earth a second time.

 

[Wannano]

I don’t know PJM, but I agree that the comparison I made isn’t perfect. For one thing, if I lived in Rome then the Pope would in fact be my bishop … whereas I don’t believe “Jesus is my Pope” is true for anyone.

I agree and I never put it that way. I wrote Jesus is my “Pope.”

 

[rinnie]

one

holy [the church itself[ not so the people in it

catholic

& apostolic

I got a chuckle how you put Holy the Church not the people in it!
[/quote]

 

[Wannano]

I got a chuckle how you put Holy the Church not the people in it!

And so Rinnie, I am choosing to answer PJM’s concerns (I am sure he will see this) as well as responding to your post.

My response to your chuckle is “how sad” for you see, my concept of the church or the Body of Christ, His bride, is not an institution or a building but the people. We as individuals make up the Church of God. That is the one true Church Jesus started and will see to completion. We are called to be holy as He is holy. Read 1 Peter.

We obviously have differing opinions of what the one true Church of God is. You mentioned in another post something I appreciated and that was that I have a right to my viewpoint. I am extremely thankful to God that I have that right and privilege as many of my ancestors were not afforded that freedom and were martyred for their belief.

 

[rinnie]

And so Rinnie, I am choosing to answer PJM’s concerns (I am sure he will see this) as well as responding to your post.

My response to your chuckle is “how sad” for you see, my concept of the church or the Body of Christ, His bride, is not an institution or a building but the people. We as individuals make up the Church of God. That is the one true Church Jesus started and will see to completion. We are called to be holy as He is holy. Read 1 Peter.

We obviously have differing opinions of what the one true Church of God is. You mentioned in another post something I appreciated and that was that I have a right to my viewpoint. I am extremely thankful to God that I have that right and privilege as many of my ancestors were not afforded that freedom and were martyred for their belief.

And my response to you is how sad we cannot have a sense of humor on these threads and have to be so serious all the time.

I know we are all called to be Holy, and there are many people who are part of the RCC in, my opinion are indeed taking the call from Christ to become Saints.

I believe PJM and I have been on these threads long enough and PJM gets me. Sorry to trying to lighten the moment. But you will see I do this often, and will continue to at times. ITs just my nature. Sorry you took offense. Now I must go to see if my Steelers are heading for the Super Bowl, Go black and gold!

 

[Wannano]

And my response to you is how sad we cannot have a sense of humor on these threads and have to be so serious all the time.

I know we are all called to be Holy, and there are many people who are part of the RCC in, my opinion are indeed taking the call from Christ to become Saints.

I believe PJM and I have been on these threads long enough and PJM gets me. Sorry to trying to lighten the moment. But you will see I do this often, and will continue to at times. ITs just my nature. Sorry you took offense. Now I must go to see if my Steelers are heading for the Super Bowl, Go black and gold!

I did not realize that Pjm was trying to be funny.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

Fwiw, I would be extremely pleased if the EOs said “The RCC is a true church” … but I don’t see that happening, realistically.

Some EOs, myself included, would say that a least the RCC has a very close connection to the True Church. For whatever that is worth.

 

[Expatreprocedit]

Hello Patrick,
Maybe you misunderstood. I am not concerned with the word “co-equal.” I am saying that the idea that God the Father and God the Son are “co-equal” is absent in a reasonable read of the Bible and absent in a reasonable read of the ECF before the 4th century.
My rejection of “co-equal” is the original view of Christianity.
Your acceptance of “co-equal” is the NEW view of Christianity.

Charity, TOm

To say the rejection of “co-equal” understood as a difference in substance is just wrong. Just because the early Church was in the process of coming to an understanding of the Triunity and the divinity of Christ does not justify your statement. Read “The Way to Nicaea” by Fr. John Behr.

 

[Peter_J]

Some EOs, myself included, would say that a least the RCC has a very close connection to the True Church. For whatever that is worth.

Why thank you EPP. :thankyou:

I’d venture to say that the opinion of EOs matters as much to RCs as the opinion of RCs matters to EOs on that same question. :nun2:

 

[PJM]

I don’t know PJM, but I agree that the comparison I made isn’t perfect. For one thing, if I lived in Rome then the Pope would in fact be my bishop … whereas I don’t believe “Jesus is my Pope” is true for anyone.

AGREED!

Thanks

GBY

 

[PJM]

The translation I BOLDED in red is not a good choice of words to convey what is in the original Greek.

The Greek says that Christ will be with those disciples until the end of the “aiōnos” or “αἰῶνος”

See biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/28-20.htm.

This Greek word “αἰῶνος” is defined as “an age, a cycle (of time), especially of the present age as contrasted with the future age, and of one of a series of ages stretching to infinity”.

See biblehub.com/greek/165.htm.

So Christ is telling his disciples that He would be with them until the end of that period of time, or that “age” that they were in then. It doesn’t mean there weren’t additional “ages” to follow afterward before Christ returns to the Earth a second time.

No my FRIEND,

Nice try though.

It means what it say’s.

WHY do I say this?

1st The Eucharist; the REAL presence of Jesus in our MIdst as a FACT
John 6:47-58 & 1 St Cor 11: 23-30

2nd. this is NOT the only place that Christ has made this Promise:

For example:

John 14:18
I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you.

John.14: 26
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you

John 17: 17-20
Sanctify THEM IN TRUTH. Thy word is truth. [18] As thou hast SENT ME into the world, I ALSO SEND THEM into the world. [19] And FOR THEM do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified IN [MY] TRUTH. [20] And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;

SO HERE JESUS GIVES HIMSELF LITERALLY AS THE WARRANTY OF THE CHURCH & FAITH [BOTH SINGULAR] HE FOUNDED BEING FOR EVER GUIDED BY HIM AS WELL AS THE HOLY SPIRIT.

NO OTHER CHURCH OR FAITH CAN MAKE AND SUPPORT SUCH A CLAIM.

God Bless you!

Patrick

There IS my friend, just One True God: Triune
Co-Equal & Co Eternal

 

[PJM]

I got a chuckle how you put Holy the Church not the people in it!

IF it didn’t HURT so much so would I

Thanks

GBY

 

[PJM]

And so Rinnie, I am choosing to answer PJM’s concerns (I am sure he will see this) as well as responding to your post.

My response to your chuckle is “how sad” for you see, my concept of the church or the Body of Christ, His bride, is not an institution or a building but the people. We as individuals make up the Church of God. That is the one true Church Jesus started and will see to completion. We are called to be holy as He is holy. Read 1 Peter.

We obviously have differing opinions of what the one true Church of God is. You mentioned in another post something I appreciated and that was that I have a right to my viewpoint. I am extremely thankful to God that I have that right and privilege as many of my ancestors were not afforded that freedom and were martyred for their belief.

THANK YOU

BUT a cautionary note dear friend;

God ALSO permits man to choose to SIN; that does in no way way mean He approves of it:

GBY

Patrick

 

[Stephen168]

Mormon scripture, Book of Abraham, translated by Joseph Smith created many of the unique Mormon teachings: the nature of the priesthood (no blacks), God is near the star Kolob, the exaltation of humanity, a pre-mortal existence, rejection of creation ex nihilo, the first and second estates, and the plurality of gods**. All of these teachings come from a translation by Joseph Smith declared scripture by the Mormon Church, which science established to be an Egyptian funeral text. This is not a restoration of lost Christian beliefs, it is something Joseph Smith made up.**

The Book of Mormon should not be a “uniquely Mormon” book because Joseph Smith’s claim was that the Book of Mormon is a non-fiction history of all the American Indians and their origin in the near east.

Almost zero unique Mormon beliefs and practices come from the Book of Mormon, so believing the Book of Mormon was true history would not demand a person convert to Mormonism. I read non-fiction books all the time with no inclination to convert to the religious beliefs of the author.

Therefore, it would not be irrational to expect non-Mormon scholars in the field to believe the Book of Mormon is true, if it was. But not one non-Mormon scholar in the field believes the Book of Mormon is what Joseph Smith and the Mormon Church claim it to be.

Listing non-Mormons who you claim “supported LDS truth claims” is not the same as listing non-Mormon scholars in the field who believe the Book of Mormon is an ancient work of non-fiction about the source of all the American Indians.

Originally Posted by D&C 77

6Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.

**Mormon scripture written by Joseph Smith says the earth is 7000 years old. **This is not true.

So much of Joseph Smith’s “scripture” is not.** And add the fact that the Mormon prophet no long prophesizes or writes scripture.**

A rational person can not believe Joseph Smith received revelation or wrote scripture.

Unless you are employing some non-typical English construction, I will offer two possibilities.

1. Your statement is wrong.
2. I am not rational.

Yes, and you have not proven any of my premises to be wrong; therefore, my conclusion is not wrong: A rational person can not believe Joseph Smith received revelation or wrote scripture.

Therefore, continuing public revelation and continuing scripture are not now or have ever been the sign of the true church of Christ.

 

[mackbrislawn]

I was raised in the understanding that having that personal relationship with Jesus Christ is what makes a person a member of the Church that Jesus said He would build. Not one built or named by human hands or reasoning. Some will say that makes me my own Pope but no, Jesus Himself is my “Pope.”

Hmm…if Jesus Himself is your Pope, then Jesus must guide you directly. And you must be infallible therefore.

Everyone will certainly agree they don’t want to be a member of a church that is built or named by human hands or reasoning. And, don’t we know of churches that are indeed named by human hands? Named after fallible humans? We also know which ones they are.

I guess that would define the “True” Church, one that does not go by human reasoning, but is officially sanctioned by God to interpret the bible and define dogma. The Catholic Church claims to be such, and the Mormon Church and the Watchtower Society also make that claim.

Which has the stronger claim?

 

[steve_b]

Some EOs, myself included, would say that a least the RCC has a very close connection to the True Church. For whatever that is worth.

The Catholic Church is the Church Jesus established. Here’s a condensed 1st 400 yrs of history #34

I have a question for you

When is the 1st time in history, in writing, properly referenced, where we see the name “Orthodox Church” ?

 

[Wannano]

Hmm…if Jesus Himself is your Pope, then Jesus must guide you directly. And you must be infallible therefore.

Everyone will certainly agree they don’t want to be a member of a church that is built or named by human hands or reasoning. And, don’t we know of churches that are indeed named by human hands? Named after fallible humans? We also know which ones they are.

I guess that would define the “True” Church, one that does not go by human reasoning, but is officially sanctioned by God to interpret the bible and define dogma. The Catholic Church claims to be such, and the Mormon Church and the Watchtower Society also make that claim.

Which has the stronger claim?

Yes, I believe Jesus will guide us directly. The Lord’s Prayer asks God to do that. No, I am not infallible, just like the Pope. I understand he goes to confession.

 

[Wannano]

THANK YOU

BUT a cautionary note dear friend;

God ALSO permits man to choose to SIN; that does in no way way mean He approves of it:

GBY

Patrick

What is that supposed to infer?

 

[Expatreprocedit]

The Catholic Church is the Church Jesus established. Here’s a condensed 1st 400 yrs of history #34

I have a question for you

When is the 1st time in history, in writing, properly referenced, where we see the name “Orthodox Church” ?

We’ve been down this street. Last time you asked I actually gave you a reference to the documents of one of the 4th century councils that referenced “orthodox clergy and faithful”, in the context of church controversies, which you never responded to. “Orthodox Church” simply means “the church that is orthodox”, and “orthodoxy” is a term that goes back almost to the beginning.