Christian Forums

Quote from: trifecta on Wed Jun 24, 2009 - 22:19:43

The Pope (of Rome) having universal authority over the whole church?   Yeah, we couldn't go for that.  The early church didn't either.   bibleteacher and Tantor: Come back to that church, the church that Jesus started.   The Orthodox Church

Trifecta, you can be down right halarious at times...

If only history could support your claim...

Quote from: broach972 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 - 22:12:46If only history could support your claim...

Like Scripture, "history" is often the subject of interpretation. 

Naturally, the Eastern Orthdox would have a slightly different view of the history compared to the Western (Roman) Catholic Church.

Quote from: ozell on Thu Jun 25, 2009 - 04:25:49

QuoteI quoted Jesus own words, yet you simply ignore what Jesus said about building His Church, and continue to press on your insinuation about some other church.

Jesus said: Mt:16:18:
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

I've noticed that you people simply ignore most of the Bible because you don't agree with it.

BT

why did the Lord build his Church with Peter when it was already established in the wilderness with Israel?

take note

Peter is a Israelite the descendant of the inhabitants of the first church

The tabernacle is never referenced as the church.. the tabernacle was the dwelling place of God so that he could be with his people.

When Jesus died and was ressurected.. the curtain hiding the Holy of Holies was rent top to bottom because now instead of God dwelling in the tabernacle (temple) he dwells in the hearts over everyone he elected to be saved from the foundation of the world.

Quote from: broach972 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 - 22:12:46

Quote from: trifecta on Wed Jun 24, 2009 - 22:19:43

The Pope (of Rome) having universal authority over the whole church?   Yeah, we couldn't go for that.  The early church didn't either.   bibleteacher and Tantor: Come back to that church, the church that Jesus started.   The Orthodox Church

Trifecta, you can be down right halarious at times...

If only history could support your claim...

Broach, you disappoint me.   

Here is some evidence from a non-Orthodox source:

This is from Henry Chadwick's book The Early Church (New York:Penguin, p. 237):
"By the end of the second century, Pope Victor insisted, in a manner which other churches thought autocratic, that all churches, including those of the Greek East, should observe Easter on the same date as that determined by the Church of Rome.  But before the third century there was no call for a sustained, theoretical justification of this leadership.  All were brethren, but the Church of Rome was accepted as the first among equals."

If the church of Rome had such universal authority, why didn't the east follow the Bishop of Rome about the dating of Easter?

If the Pope had  such authority, why were two Popes cited for heretical beliefs in two ecumenical councils?  Why did Rome initially oppose the 2nd ecumenical council in Constantinople? If Rome had such authority why did the ecumenical councils exist in the first place? Why didn't he rest of the church just follow the opinion of the Bishop of Rome?

On the contrary, history supports the contention that Rome did not have universal authority. The RCC historians have tried to revise history to support their contention.

I've presented facts, you just laughed at me.  You can do better.

Hi DCR, thanks for posting.

Quote from: DCR on Fri Jun 26, 2009 - 09:51:37

Quote from: broach972 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 - 22:12:46If only history could support your claim...

Like Scripture, "history" is often the subject of interpretation. 

Maybe so, but history is important.  If the death and resurrection of Christ were not historic fact, we would have no faith.  History is about interpretation, but also about facts.   And as they say, you have the right to your own opinion, not your own facts.

Quote
Naturally, the Eastern Orthodox would have a slightly different view of the history compared to the Western (Roman) Catholic Church.

The Catholic argument for universal authority is one of those interpretations not based on fact.  Because the Pope claimed universal authority later in history (beginning in the 4th century--but on and off for a while; Leo III, for example, rejected it) and the faith was established "once for all" Jude 3, the church tried to claim Papal universal authority since the beginning.  Historical data (facts) simply doesn't support that contention, as I noted in the previous post. 

So, while our view is indeed different than the RCC's, it is not based on a different interpretation of the same facts.  It is based on facts alone, not an anachronistic view of history.  See the difference?

The tabernacle is never referenced as the church.. the tabernacle was the dwelling place of God so that he could be with his people.

When Jesus died and was ressurected.. the curtain hiding the Holy of Holies was rent top to bottom because now instead of God dwelling in the tabernacle (temple) he dwells in the hearts over everyone he elected to be saved from the foundation of the world.[/quote]

Acts 7:44 Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen.

the church is the people, not the building! the church is Israel physical or spiritually!

Ex 12v37: And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.
38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

there were people from all over the world included in this church started in the wilderness.

Quote from: trifecta on Fri Jun 26, 2009 - 11:21:11So, while our view is indeed different than the RCC's, it is not based on a different interpretation of the same facts.  It is based on facts alone, not an anachronistic view of history.  See the difference?

Perhaps, but the "facts" are often in dispute.

Quote from: bibleteacher on Tue Jun 23, 2009 - 15:53:14
The Bible plainly reads that Jesus started His Own Church 2000 years ago. In fact, the Church is mentioned more than 100 times in the Bible.

Mt:16:18:
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Jesus said those who refuse to obey His CHurch are to be considered heathens

Mt:18:17:
And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

Priests were ordained in every Church

Acts:14:23:
And when they had ordained to them priests in every church and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, in whom they believed.

The Sacrament of Confirmation was practiced by the Church

Acts:16:5:
And the churches were confirmed in faith and increased in number daily.

The Bishops ruled the Church of God in the first century, just as they do today.

Acts:20:28:
Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood.

The Church is the pillar of truth

1Tm:3:15:
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The church that Jesus started?  You mean the Bible Church?

Quote from: DCR on Sat Jun 27, 2009 - 07:47:04

Quote from: trifecta on Fri Jun 26, 2009 - 11:21:11So, while our view is indeed different than the RCC's, it is not based on a different interpretation of the same facts.  It is based on facts alone, not an anachronistic view of history.  See the difference?

Perhaps, but the "facts" are often in dispute.

Yes, you are right.  As I said, the resurrection of Christ is a fact, but it is in dispute.  

The difference between interpreting Scripture and the issue of universal authority is we have different interpretations of the same words (the facts) in Biblical interpretation while with universal authority, the RCC claims things that are facts, but are not.

 So, they (sometimes) posit that the Bishop of Rome had universal authority since the beginning.   But this can be disproven using facts  Fact: Rome wanted the universal church to celebrate Easter on the same day, but the eastern churches wouldn't do it.  Fact: The Bishop of Rome was not and did not send delegates to the 2nd ecumenical council and did not support its decisions for a while.  Fact: Two popes were anathamatized at two separate ecumenical councils.  

Rome tries to dispute these facts.  They say that the Popes approved of the ecumenical councils (without any evidence).  That those disgraced popes (Virgilius, Honorius) were condemned because of private opinions, not public decisions.

Nevertheless, we can't let the complexities of opinions divert us from the question: did the Bishop of Rome have universality over the church?  There can be only one correct answer--yes or no.

Quote from: trifecta on Sat Jun 27, 2009 - 11:09:55
Nevertheless, we can't let the complexities of opinions divert us from the question: did the Bishop of Rome have universality over the church?  There can be only one correct answer--yes or no.

Quote from: fanuvmxpx on Tue Jun 23, 2009 - 16:06:32
The true protestants...the ones who seek Jesus and don't simply claim Him...have zero convictions for child molestation.

Lets put that a little differently. First its not Catholic or Protestant. Evil happens on both sides of the river.  Pointing fingers is childish.

These things ought no be in the church but it still happens. And that's truly a shame. God does not know Catholic or Protestant. he only sees his church, and that is us, and he knows us very well.

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jun 30, 2009 - 07:21:19

Quote from: fanuvmxpx on Tue Jun 23, 2009 - 16:06:32
These things ought no be in the church but it still happens. And that's truly a shame. God does not know Catholic or Protestant. he only sees his church, and that is us, and he knows us very well.

God only sees his church. which church are you refering to? not the catholic church, i hope. selling indulgences , forbidding people to read the bible and killing them if they do. that cant be gods church. any imbecile can figure thay one out.

Quote from: wayne on Wed Jul 01, 2009 - 13:31:40

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jun 30, 2009 - 07:21:19

Quote from: fanuvmxpx on Tue Jun 23, 2009 - 16:06:32
These things ought no be in the church but it still happens. And that's truly a shame. God does not know Catholic or Protestant. he only sees his church, and that is us, and he knows us very well.

God only sees his church. which church are you refering to? not the catholic church, i hope. selling indulgences , forbidding people to read the bible and killing them if they do. that cant be gods church. any imbecile can figure thay one out.

You see the church as the institutional organized system. And that is not how God sees his church. This is a result of mans traditions We now see the system as the church instead of seeing the body as the church.  Yes much evil and corruptions exist in it both catholic and Protestant. God does not know Catholic or Protestant.  There are those who truly love christ on both sides and there are those who are only religious. God Knows his own and in that time he will separate them Just as he said he will separate the sheep from the Goats. Its not like God is choosing any pet denomination at Judgment    He certainly knows who the false teachers are mislead like blind guides.

Quote from: mclees8 on Wed Jul 01, 2009 - 16:40:09

Quote from: wayne on Wed Jul 01, 2009 - 13:31:40

Quote from: mclees8 on Tue Jun 30, 2009 - 07:21:19

Quote from: fanuvmxpx on Tue Jun 23, 2009 - 16:06:32
These things ought no be in the church but it still happens. And that's truly a shame. God does not know Catholic or Protestant. he only sees his church, and that is us, and he knows us very well.

God only sees his church. which church are you refering to? not the catholic church, i hope. selling indulgences , forbidding people to read the bible and killing them if they do. that cant be gods church. any imbecile can figure thay one out.

You see the church as the institutional organized system. And that is not how God sees his church. This is a result of mans traditions We now see the system as the church instead of seeing the body as the church.  Yes much evil and corruptions exist in it both catholic and Protestant. God does not know Catholic or Protestant.  There are those who truly love christ on both sides and there are those who are only religious. God Knows his own and in that time he will separate them Just as he said he will separate the sheep from the Goats. Its not like God is choosing any pet denomination at Judgment    He certainly knows who the false teachers are mislead like blind guides.

youre rite. either youre saved or not. if you get saved while protestant or catholic, you wander out of its grip and find other saved people. the spirit finds them and guides you to them. the saved are the body, or church of christ. they have no name or rituals. they are pilgrims in a strange land. want to be saved? ask jesus to show himself to you. he gives freely

Y'all need to fix your quote boxes.  I can't tell who's saying what.  

Quote from: DCR on Thu Jul 02, 2009 - 07:28:48
Y'all need to fix your quote boxes.  I can't tell who's saying what.  

Thats okay I think we agree that salvation is not a denominational thing.
God bless

yes it is.  you have to be a mormon to be saved. i mean a catholic. oopps i mean a SDA

Let us descend into an abyss as we spy out the predatory, lascivious, unclean, perversity of the Romish priesthood. They are notoriously incontinent. They only follow the example set for them by the popes themselves...ungodly men who have been some of the most cruel, licentious, perverted beasts in history. Read of Pope John XII who committed incest with his mother, sister and his father's concubine (Popes of Rome by Ronald Cooke, p. 11). John XXIII (or XXII) was convicted of lust, murder, rape, sodomy and piracy (ibid p. 19). Ronald Cooke says--

When one looks at the lives of some of these men who claimed, and still claim, to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, he sees a ghastly array of egregrious evils both moral and spiritual which cannot be matched by any other group of men, or by any other organization, in the annals of history. Other men and organizations have committed great evils, but never on such a wide scale and never for such a long time.

James 4:11-12  "Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?"

desert, i was hoping you were asleep.its just facts. but now youre making me feel bad about posting them

Quote from: fanuvmxpx on Tue Jun 23, 2009 - 15:56:34
Catholicism, our spiritual leaders touch little boys, obviously we have it all figured out and are discerning the scriptures correctly.

And so we see that the response here must immediately go away from the conversation because the person trying to desperately respond cannot defend his position and must use calumny and detraction in order to somehow steer the conversation away from the original subject. this would be like starting a conversation about the good that plants do for us, and the responder stating how terrible marijuana is and how the poppy has killed more people than we could ever count.

Side stepping is okay, if you are truly ignorant of the Church Jesus started and want to delve into childish things like only pointing to the 2% of terrible sinners(weeds amongst the wheat) in the Church.

peace, papist