Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do you believe the catholic church was the 1st church?
yes 21 29.58%
no 50 70.42%
Voters: 71. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2012, 08:06 PM
 
420 posts, read 802,501 times
Reputation: 444

Advertisements

Katie-

There simply were not early Christians who believe what you do now. I hear this argument often, and it is nothing more than a delusion. You would think there would be some historical evidence if there was. There isn't. Zero, nada, zilch. Simply does not exist. It is revisionist history at its finest, and as "man-made" (literally) as can be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-31-2012, 03:15 AM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 21,861,394 times
Reputation: 2226
Quote:
Originally Posted by garya123 View Post
Here are the keys to the Kingdom. JN 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by Me.
Oh, for Pete's sake...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 03:58 AM
 
9,651 posts, read 1,171,669 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmforte View Post
I believe it is common knowledge that the other Apostolic Sees started out with many elders/bishops but then evolved to coming under just one for a number of reasons. Many historians and scholars, including some Catholic ones, believe that the early christian church was organized after the Jewish synagogue. However, Rome might be a different story. Romans always had a grandiose sense of self and self-importance. The Roman Church was probably modeled after the Roman government and old pagan religion. The fact remains, however, there was a Bishop of Rome, like there are Bishops (now some are called "Patriarches") of other Apotolic Sees in the first and second centuries and that that Bishop had successors, all the way down to the present day. There is enough archaeological and documentary evidence attesting to this. Only a few extremist sects really deny it. Anglicans, Lutherans, the Eastern Orthodox, and many other mainline groups do not.
I just read Ignatius' letter to the church at Rome, written 110 A.D. This is approx 50 years after apostle Peter died. The letter is witten to the elders/bishops/overseers/shepherds (plural) There is no single Bishop of Rome mentioned. THIS IS FIFTY YEARS AFTER PETER DIED! Peter was made Pope or Bishop of Rome in retrospect. The early church never intended such a thing.

Please read it for yourself. There is no single Bishop in Rome 2nd century. Eventually, the church evolved to have a single bishop, but in the early church there was none.

Bottom line: You ignore the truths of the Bible. You ignore the words of early church fathers.

Katie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 04:44 AM
 
420 posts, read 802,501 times
Reputation: 444
Quote:
Originally Posted by katiemygirl View Post
I just read Ignatius' letter to the church at Rome, written 110 A.D. This is approx 50 years after apostle Peter died. The letter is witten to the elders/bishops/overseers/shepherds (plural) There is no single Bishop of Rome mentioned. THIS IS FIFTY YEARS AFTER PETER DIED! Peter was made Pope or Bishop of Rome in retrospect. The early church never intended such a thing.

Please read it for yourself. There is no single Bishop in Rome 2nd century. Eventually, the church evolved to have a single bishop, but in the early church there was none.

Bottom line: You ignore the truths of the Bible. You ignore the words of early church fathers.

Katie
If you are an honest student of history, you will see that there are numerous & consistent writings to confirm the position & legacy of the Popes.

Here are a few examples:

1. “Please note that the Early Church always accepted the Bishop of Rome as the head of the Church. Around AD 80, the Church of Corinth deposed it’s lawful leaders. The fourth bishop of Rome, Pope Clement I, was called to settle the matter even though St. John the Apostle was still alive and much closer to Corinth than was Rome.

2. St Irenaus, who was taught by St. Polycarp (a disciple of St. John the Apostle), stresses that Christians must be united to the Church of Rome in order to maintain the Apostolic Tradition. He then lists all the bishops of Rome up to his time.

St. Irenaeus was Bishop of Lyons from about AD 180-200. He is considered one of the greatest theologians of the immediate post Apostolic period. In his work Against Heresies, St. Irenaeus makes the following statement about the Church of Rome & the successors of St. Peter: “…the successions here of the bishops of the greatest & most ancient Church known to all, founded & organized at rome by two of the most glorious Apostles, Peter & Paul, that Church which has the tradition & the faith comes down to us after having been announced to men by the Apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that it is in her that the faithful have maintained the Apostolic Tradition†(3,3,3; Jurgens #211)

St. Irenaeus then goes on to name all the Popes succeeding Peter up to his time—12 in all. (William A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers(Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970) (3,3,3 Jurgens # 211)

3. For 250 years the Roman Emperors tried to destroy Christianity through persecution. In the first 200 years of Christianity, every Pope but one was martyred-the Romans certainly knew who the head of the Church was!â€


A Roman emperor’s greatest fear was a rival to the throne. Never the less, the Emperor Decius, one of the harshest persecutors of the early Christian Church, made the following remark: “ I would far rather receive news of a rival to the throne than that of another Bishop of Rome.†Decius said this after he executed Pope Fabian in AD 250. (Christian History, Issue 27, entitled “Persecution in the Early Church†(1990, Volume IX, no. 3, 22)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 05:13 AM
 
9,651 posts, read 1,171,669 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsychDoc View Post
Katie-

There simply were not early Christians who believe what you do now. I hear this argument often, and it is nothing more than a delusion. You would think there would be some historical evidence if there was. There isn't. Zero, nada, zilch. Sim
ply does not exist. It is revisionist history at its finest, and as "man-made" (literally) as can be.
I believe what the christians of the Bible believed. Or don't you consider them christians?
All the evidence is written in the confines of God's word. What more evidence is needed?
Your accusation makes no sense to me.

So why don't you point out specifically what it is that I believe that the early christians didn't believe.

With all due respect,

Katie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 05:21 AM
 
9,651 posts, read 1,171,669 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsychDoc View Post
If you are an honest student of history, you will see that there are numerous & consistent writings to confirm the position & legacy of the Popes.

Here are a few examples:

1. “Please note that the Early Church always accepted the Bishop of Rome as the head of the Church. Around AD 80, the Church of Corinth deposed it’s lawful leaders. The fourth bishop of Rome, Pope Clement I, was called to settle the matter even though St. John the Apostle was still alive and much closer to Corinth than was Rome.

2. St Irenaus, who was taught by St. Polycarp (a disciple of St. John the Apostle), stresses that Christians must be united to the Church of Rome in order to maintain the Apostolic Tradition. He then lists all the bishops of Rome up to his time.

St. Irenaeus was Bishop of Lyons from about AD 180-200. He is considered one of the greatest theologians of the immediate post Apostolic period. In his work Against Heresies, St. Irenaeus makes the following statement about the Church of Rome & the successors of St. Peter: “…the successions here of the bishops of the greatest & most ancient Church known to all, founded & organized at rome by two of the most glorious Apostles, Peter & Paul, that Church which has the tradition & the faith comes down to us after having been announced to men by the Apostles. For with this Church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that it is in her that the faithful have maintained the Apostolic Tradition†(3,3,3; Jurgens #211)

St. Irenaeus then goes on to name all the Popes succeeding Peter up to his time—12 in all. (William A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers(Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1970) (3,3,3 Jurgens # 211)

3. For 250 years the Roman Emperors tried to destroy Christianity through persecution. In the first 200 years of Christianity, every Pope but one was martyred-the Romans certainly knew who the head of the Church was!â€


A Roman emperor’s greatest fear was a rival to the throne. Never the less, the Emperor Decius, one of the harshest persecutors of the early Christian Church, made the following remark: “ I would far rather receive news of a rival to the throne than that of another Bishop of Rome.†Decius said this after he executed Pope Fabian in AD 250. (Christian History, Issue 27, entitled “Persecution in the Early Church†(1990, Volume IX, no. 3, 22)
An honest Bible student will post the primary sources.

I suggest we look at quotes from the ECF's. I find none who reference a single bishop of Rome presiding over the church. I see pluralities of elders in each local church, including Rome.

Katie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 05:55 AM
 
889 posts, read 819,735 times
Reputation: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by katiemygirl View Post
I believe what the christians of the Bible believed. Or don't you consider them christians?
All the evidence is written in the confines of God's word. What more evidence is needed?
Your accusation makes no sense to me.

So why don't you point out specifically what it is that I believe that the early christians didn't believe.

With all due respect,

Katie
What you don't understand is that for almost 400 years there were no Christians of the Bible and if weren't for the Catholics there would still be no Bible. Get your arms around that fact and give it hug because it is truth. Apparently this truth rocks your world and so it should. But I still can't believe 9/11 happened, but yet it did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 06:58 AM
 
2,541 posts, read 2,526,815 times
Reputation: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Oh, for Pete's sake...
I do not know why you say such a thing. Jesus is the master key to the Kingdom and and all the other keys to living for Christ is to be in His way of life, filled with Truth, to produce the Life of Christ in you. Those three things are a summation of what the keys mean. Your very determined to dog me and criticize every thing that I say whither good or bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 07:39 AM
 
889 posts, read 819,735 times
Reputation: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by garya123 View Post
I do not know why you say such a thing. Jesus is the master key to the Kingdom and and all the other keys to living for Christ is to be in His way of life, filled with Truth, to produce the Life of Christ in you. Those three things are a summation of what the keys mean. Your very determined to dog me and criticize every thing that I say whither good or bad.
Jesus is the head of His Church. However, things still need to run down here for over a billion people, hence the earthly leader of His Church, the Pope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 07:41 AM
 
12,030 posts, read 9,279,269 times
Reputation: 2845
Quote:
Originally Posted by katiemygirl View Post
An honest Bible student will post the primary sources.

I suggest we look at quotes from the ECF's. I find none who reference a single bishop of Rome presiding over the church. I see pluralities of elders in each local church, including Rome.

Katie
Dear Katie

The big question is:

Why are some Protestants sects so obsessed with disproving Apostolic succession and Papal succession?
Obviously they are out of the loop. It is as simple as that.
If we follow your logic then the early church had no leadership. If we follow that logic there were no leaders until Constantine 300 years later when suddenly Catholicism appeared out of nowhere.

Katie, the church had leaders and these leaders believed in apostolic succession. Without leadership and some organization the church would not have been able to spread Christianity to the world.

Quote:
The Council of Jerusalem (or Apostolic Conference) is a name applied by historians and theologians to an Early Christian council that was held in Jerusalem and dated to around the year 50. It is considered by Catholics and Orthodox to be a prototype and forerunner of the later Ecumenical Councils. The council decided that Gentile converts to Christianity were not obligated to keep most of the Mosaic law, including the rules concerning circumcision of males, however, the Council did retain the prohibitions against eating blood, or eating meat containing blood, or meat of animals not properly slain, and against fornication and idolatry.
WIKI

The council of Jerusalem clearly demonstrates the church had leadership and was becoming highly organized.

The other issue is that the original Christians did not have a New Testament.

It was the catholic church the one that provided the Bible to the folks that now use the Bible to discredit the Catholic church. IMHO, it is illogical for folks that follow the Bible to the letter to discredit the origin of the Catholic church as not been based on the Bible when there was no written New Testament at that time.

Here is a biblical description of the first council by the leaders of the Christian church (later to be called catholic church). I quote this passage because this is not allegoric. This is simply history written in the Bible.

Quote:

Acts 15

The Council at Jerusalem

1 Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3 The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them. 5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
Look at the passage in bold. Peter was there and he was clearly the leader of the church.

I admit there was no Vatican city at that time and that the hierarchy of the church was not as it is today, but nevertheless, the scriptures clearly chow that the RCC is apostolic and that the first leader was Peter as commanded by Jesus.

Last edited by Julian658; 01-31-2012 at 08:06 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top