Why are there so many rules in the Catholic Church?

[Catholica]

Here is a great answer to that question:

Road Closed Catholic Speaker and Evangelist Ken Yasinski

[kensington]

I had to laugh, you just asked and answered your own question, the way you wanted it answered.

I think your video would have more meaning if someone else actually had asked the question. 

[Jd34]

If it was not for the Catholic Church, Christianity would have never succeeded. I am not catholic but I will always have a special place in my heart for Catholicism.

A breif explanation:

Judaism verses Rome during during the time Christ walked the earth.. You have to remember that Rome was built upon Greek learning. And Greek learning is based on lots of effort and hard work. So they strived for "arête" (excellence) which they viewed as only being achieved by discipline and hard work.....  Rome had become the most powerfull empire in the physical world because of this..They had acheived Arête with respect to the physical word...Now they desired to acheive spiritual Arête. Then Rome would have it all covered- the physical and spiritual world.

At first, the teachings of Christ went totally against their way of thinking. There just wasn't enough work and displine in Christs message to be saved. It did not make sense to them on how you could just acheive Arete instantly by being saved as jesus taught. So Rome converted Judaism into what we know as Catholicism with its many rules and Hail Marys. 

With out the Roman Empire, Christianity would had never triumphed.

So big thanks to all My Catholic brothers out there!!   

[mclees8]

With out the Roman Empire, Christianity would had never triumphed.

So big thanks to all My Catholic brothers out there!!   



Oh brother!     

[Jd34]

With out the Roman Empire, Christianity would had never triumphed.

So big thanks to all My Catholic brothers out there!!   



Oh brother!     

Explain the "Oh brother" part for me please.

[Catholica]

I had to laugh, you just asked and answered your own question, the way you wanted it answered.

I think your video would have more meaning if someone else actually had asked the question.

I pray that people who are asking the question themselves might find this post and come to a better understanding of the Catholic faith, and that God might give them hearts of flesh if they once had hearts of stone.

[mclees8]

With out the Roman Empire, Christianity would had never triumphed.

So big thanks to all My Catholic brothers out there!!   



Oh brother!     




Explain the "Oh brother" part for me please.



Well we could say this:   without the world Christianity would not exist 

[Catholica]

With out the Roman Empire, Christianity would had never triumphed.

So big thanks to all My Catholic brothers out there!!   



Oh brother!     




Explain the "Oh brother" part for me please.



Well we could say this:   without the world Christianity would not exist 

In other words, you can't explain your statement.

[Jd34]

No!  Maybe I should say it in another way. We have Rome to thank for spreading Christianity and I can preach that till the cows come home!

So where does " the Oh brother" comment come from?  Please explain and explain it on how I am mistaken.  Learning is a two way street. 

[Catholica]

Thanks for the "thanks", Jd34, but I think this notion you have of the Romans transforming Judaism into Catholicism due to their desire for excellence is a bit a-historical and theoretical.  What evidence do you claim supports this theory?

[DaveW]

So Rome converted Judaism into what we know as Catholicism with its many rules and Hail Marys.

In the famous words of M*A*S*H's Col. Potter:  "HORSE HOCKEY!"

Clearly you know little of either Judaism or Catholicism.

[kensington]

I don't know if I agree that they took Judaism changed it into Catholicism or if they did, why anyone would be thankful for that.

I guess you mean all the rules, and religious trappings, the old testament ceremonies and priesthood, perhaps.  Even all the religious leaders being high and above the lay person.  But, if there is anything that the Jews learned, it is "have NO Idols" ... and it seems the Catholics have more idols than the Egypt had.  Here a statue, there a statue, every where a statue, statue. KWIM? 

[Jd34]

History tell us this .... The study of Western Civilization at any State University sophomore level explains it very well.. But then again I don't know, maybe I got a substandard education at The University of TN..  If so, tell me where I have been misgiven.. I would appreciate it very much!

Thanks again

[Catholica]

Well jd34, to start with, a series of emperors did their best to eliminate Christianity for 300 years following the time of Christ, crucifying Christians and using them as torches to light the road, or placing them in the coliseum to be eaten by lions because they refused to accept the pantheon of Gods that they had adopted.

It wasn't until a miracle in 313 with Constantine that Christianity was anything but underground, anything better than a minority curiosity when they were not being persecuted.

This actual history is so far from what you have suggested.  Very, very far.

[Jd34]

Yes but like any history it progressed and I am talking about the times of Constantine and what led up to the council of Nicaea. Without Constatine (Without the authority if Rome) Christianity would have never became a mainstream religion.

Better said Catholicism spawned from Judaism after Christ came along..

You guys going to make me whip out my history books?? Lol

[kensington]

Well jd34, to start with, a series of emperors did their best to eliminate Christianity for 300 years following the time of Christ, crucifying Christians and using them as torches to light the road, or placing them in the coliseum to be eaten by lions because they refused to accept the pantheon of Gods that they had adopted.

It wasn't until a miracle in 313 with Constantine that Christianity was anything but underground, anything better than a minority curiosity when they were not being persecuted.

This actual history is so far from what you have suggested.  Very, very far.

Yes, and when this Emperor decided to merge his government with Christianity, that is when the first church split happened,  Rome became the Catholic church and they started making up their own rules and the true church went on as they had for 300+ years.  There has always been the church that did not become Catholic when Constantine did that.  The church however small, lived on walking with Christ alone. Meeting in homes and keeping the faith.  And they were persecuted by the Catholic Church for centuries.

[Catholica]

Yes but like any history it progressed and I am talking about the times of Constantine and what led up to the council of Nicaea. Without Constatine (Without the authority if Rome) Christianity would have never became a mainstream religion.

Better said Catholicism spawned from Judaism after Christ came along..

You guys going to make me whip out my history books?? Lol

Christianity was originally considered to be a sect of Judaism well before the Romans had any influence into the matter.  But with the destruction of Jerusalem and the soon so-called "council" of Jamnia, the Jews made a clean break with Christianity and Christianity continued on it's way.

In the time of Constantine, it was ruled that Christianity was to be "tolerated".  It wasn't adopted as the official religion of the Roman empire until long after Nicea, and it is certain that it was not wrested from any Jewish people.  The pope continued to be the pope and the bishops continued being the bishops and they continued teaching the same truths they always had.  Only once the Emperor Theodosius I converted to Christianity did Christianity become the religion of the Roman empire. 

So how does your idea of this "Arete" fit into anything?  Constantine, once he conquered Rome, allowed Christianity to be tolerated, that is, made legal.  It is Christianity that eventually converted the emperors, not the emperors who decided what Christianity should be.

[Jd34]

Arête was to achieve excellence. And early Romans held to the greek philosophy that excellence can only be attained through hard work and discipline..You have to work hard to reach that level.  They were extremely offended by Jesus saying only love, asking for forgiveness and believing in him is all that was needed to reach the highest of the highest levels which the Romans likened to Arête. Jesus went against years of Greek and roman culture...and the pursecution of Christians ensued...

True, it wasn't until Constantine prayed to our Christian God and gave Him credit for victory in battle that Christianity began to take a foot hold....but still there existed the decades of Greek philosophy in the roman culture that became meshed with the belief in the Christian God...pretty much the birth of Catholicism..so in other words Rome turned early Christianity into what fit them best...The "split" that someone posted earlier..


Sorry for bad gramer but hard typing from my little I phone..lol

[winsome]

True, it wasn't until Constantine prayed to our Christian God and gave Him credit for victory in battle that Christianity began to take a foot hold....but still there existed the decades of Greek philosophy in the roman culture that became meshed with the belief in the Christian God...pretty much the birth of Catholicism..so in other words Rome turned early Christianity into what fit them best...The "split" that someone posted earlier..

An hypothesis for which you provide no evidence - probably because there is none. If you read the writings of early fathers you will find they taught then what the Catholic Church teaches now. And many defended their beliefs with their lives

[winsome]

Yes, and when this Emperor decided to merge his government with Christianity, that is when the first church split happened,  Rome became the Catholic church and they started making up their own rules and the true church went on as they had for 300+ years.  There has always been the church that did not become Catholic when Constantine did that.  The church however small, lived on walking with Christ alone. Meeting in homes and keeping the faith.  And they were persecuted by the Catholic Church for centuries.

As usual no evidence is supplied.

We have evidence for the Catholic Church - records of meetings, writings, we know who the leaders were.

Where are the records of this "church"? Where are the writings? Who were the leaders?

[Jd34]

True, it wasn't until Constantine prayed to our Christian God and gave Him credit for victory in battle that Christianity began to take a foot hold....but still there existed the decades of Greek philosophy in the roman culture that became meshed with the belief in the Christian God...pretty much the birth of Catholicism..so in other words Rome turned early Christianity into what fit them best...The "split" that someone posted earlier..

An hypothesis for which you provide no evidence - probably because there is none. If you read the writings of early fathers you will find they taught then what the Catholic Church teaches now. And many defended their beliefs with their lives

The break with Judaism is when Paul reached out to the Gentiles. Paul had to disentangle Christianity from the Jewish sociocultural context..He made it attractive to the Greco-Roman world..( lots of time in between- it was slow to take off) ....,.they then added their "spin" or cultural attributes on things which becomes incorporated into what becomes the Catholic Church. And its beginnings as a World Religion started with Constantine..Plenty of evidence!.

[winsome]

The break with Judaism is when Paul reached out to the Gentiles. Paul had to disentangle Christianity from the Jewish sociocultural context..He made it attractive to the Greco-Roman world..( lots of time in between- it was slow to take off) ....,.they then added their "spin" or cultural attributes on things which becomes incorporated into what becomes the Catholic Church. And its beginnings as a World Religion started with Constantine..Plenty of evidence!.

And where is this evidence?

You provide none.

Just stating your opinion isn't evidence

[Jd34]

The break with Judaism is when Paul reached out to the Gentiles. Paul had to disentangle Christianity from the Jewish sociocultural context..He made it attractive to the Greco-Roman world..( lots of time in between- it was slow to take off) ....,.they then added their "spin" or cultural attributes on things which becomes incorporated into what becomes the Catholic Church. And its beginnings as a World Religion started with Constantine..Plenty of evidence!.

And where is this evidence?

You provide none.

Just stating your opinion isn't evidence

You know I can ask you the same. Where is your evidence of anything? How do you know what is written is the truth?  How do you know that??? Did you see it written?  Did you observe the fact?? People tell me all the time there is no evidence of God? Is God just your opinion?

What I am posting is what I have been educated on, it's not my opinion ..and I see no reason to doubt it,.I understand how history can be flawed but I rely on God to keep me straight--God is all I really have for when it comes to truth..

Sorry for the "evidence" rant but come on, you don't need to play that game use your brain a little.

[winsome]

You know I can ask you the same. Where is your evidence of anything? How do you know what is written is the truth?  How do you know that??? Did you see it written?  Did you observe the fact?? People tell me all the time there is no evidence of God? Is God just your opinion?

What I am posting is what I have been educated on, it's not my opinion ..and I see no reason to doubt it,.I understand how history can be flawed but I rely on God to keep me straight--God is all I really have for when it comes to truth..

You make a claim. It is up to you to provide evidence to back up that claim.

There is also a valid saying (I think attributed to Epicurus) "That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".

If you provide something substantial as evidence I will try & provide evidence to refute it.

Evidence comes from acknowledged primary sources if possible, then reputable secondary sources etc.

On a forum such as this we can take the Scriptures as valid evidence without having to prove their truthfulness. Our interpretations of those scriptures are, of course, open to challenge.

Would Protestants believe Catholics just saying "Well that's what I have been educated on" so it must be true?

There also rule 1.3 of this forum:
1.3 You will only post negative statements about another individual's belief or religious organization (including non-Christian religions) with objective evidence provided. Members are allowed to say "The doctrines X church is false because of Y scriptures and Z other relevant evidence."

You have made two posts with negative statements about the Catholic Church and provided no evidence to back them up.

[Jd34]

You know I can ask you the same. Where is your evidence of anything? How do you know what is written is the truth?  How do you know that??? Did you see it written?  Did you observe the fact?? People tell me all the time there is no evidence of God? Is God just your opinion?

What I am posting is what I have been educated on, it's not my opinion ..and I see no reason to doubt it,.I understand how history can be flawed but I rely on God to keep me straight--God is all I really have for when it comes to truth..

You make a claim. It is up to you to provide evidence to back up that claim.

There is also a valid saying (I think attributed to Epicurus) "That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".

If you provide something substantial as evidence I will try & provide evidence to refute it.

Evidence comes from acknowledged primary sources if possible, then reputable secondary sources etc.

On a forum such as this we can take the Scriptures as valid evidence without having to prove their truthfulness. Our interpretations of those scriptures are, of course, open to challenge.

Would Protestants believe Catholics just saying "Well that's what I have been educated on" so it must be true?

There also rule 1.3 of this forum:
1.3 You will only post negative statements about another individual's belief or religious organization (including non-Christian religions) with objective evidence provided. Members are allowed to say "The doctrines X church is false because of Y scriptures and Z other relevant evidence."

You have made two posts with negative statements about the Catholic Church and provided no evidence to back them up.

Show me the evidence of what is "negative" . Being "negative" is your opinion. But if you can prove its negative, then  I will do my best to provide the evidence you seek.

[winsome]

 Note particularly the parts I have emboldened

True, it wasn't until Constantine prayed to our Christian God and gave Him credit for victory in battle that Christianity began to take a foot hold....but still there existed the decades of Greek philosophy in the roman culture that became meshed with the belief in the Christian God...pretty much the birth of Catholicism..so in other words Rome turned early Christianity into what fit them best...The "split" that someone posted earlier..

You claim that the Romans changed Christianity, and that changed Christianity is Catholicism. Therefore Catholicism is not the original Christianity of the Bible.
 

The break with Judaism is when Paul reached out to the Gentiles. Paul had to disentangle Christianity from the Jewish sociocultural context..He made it attractive to the Greco-Roman world..( lots of time in between- it was slow to take off) ....,.they then added their "spin" or cultural attributes on things which becomes incorporated into what becomes the Catholic Church. And its beginnings as a World Religion started with Constantine..Plenty of evidence!.

"He made it attractive to the Greco-Roman world" implies that Paul perverted the gospel. Then you say that "spin" was added and incorporated into what becomes the Catholic Church. Again you are claiming that the Catholic Church is not the Church founded by Jesus Christ but is a twisted version of it.

Your claim that the beginnings of Christianity/Catholicism (it's not clear which you mean) as World Religion started with Constantine is also false.
Paul travelled widely in the Roman Empire converting people to Christ– as recorded in the Book of Acts.

The first known Christian martyr in England was Alban (3^rd century) at Verulanium (now called St. Albans). (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/12462/Saint-Alban). England was pretty much at the edge of the empire which shows that Christianity had spread throught the empire by the time of Constantine.

[Jd34]

I'm not implying negative on anything. Paul did make Christianity attractive to the Greco-Roman world. Paul held that neither Gentile nor Jewish followers of Jesus were bound by the hundred rituals and rules that constitute Mosiac Law.  So by Paul taking  Jewish culture out of the equation open the door for and made Christianity appealing for Rome...

Just to start-- is this still negative to you? Are you going to require evidence of this? I'm just starting,

[winsome]

I'm not implying negative on anything. Paul did make Christianity attractive to the Greco-Roman world. Paul held that neither Gentile nor Jewish followers of Jesus were bound by the hundred rituals and rules that constitute Mosiac Law.  So by Paul taking  Jewish culture out if the equation open the door for and made Christianity appealing for Rome...

Just to start-- is this still negative to you? Are you going to require evidence of this? I'm just starting,

OK, that's good (if you are just referring to Paul's presentation of the gospel rather than changing the gospel) - an example with a reference to scripture.

[Jd34]

I'm not implying negative on anything. Paul did make Christianity attractive to the Greco-Roman world. Paul held that neither Gentile nor Jewish followers of Jesus were bound by the hundred rituals and rules that constitute Mosiac Law.  So by Paul taking  Jewish culture out if the equation open the door for and made Christianity appealing for Rome...

Just to start-- is this still negative to you? Are you going to require evidence of this? I'm just starting,

OK, that's good (if you are just referring to Paul's presentation of the gospel rather than changing the gospel) - an example with a reference to scripture.

Winsom, in a strange way you make me laugh..you remind me of a hard core skeptic and a conspiracy theorist at the same time... Lol... Please don't take offense at that... Its just that I am not a good communicator and after years of education and growth in the spirit I have peace in every aspect of my life. I don't want to feel that same kind of anguish that Peter and Paul must have felt during their disagreements. the effort that I would have to put in to clarifying my position on Catholicism or the Catholic Church is a mute point..Just know that I view the Catholic Church as a positive force. Any church or religion that glorify our Lord and Savior Christ I am good with...

[winsome]

Winsom, in a strange way you make me laugh..you remind me of a hard core skeptic and a conspiracy theorist at the same time... Lol... Please don't take offense at that... Its just that I am not a good communicator and after years of education and growth in the spirit I have peace in every aspect of my life. I don't want to feel that same kind of anguish that Peter and Paul must have felt during their disagreements. the effort that I would have to put in to clarifying my position on Catholicism or the Catholic Church is a mute point..Just know that I view the Catholic Church as a positive force. Any church or religion that glorify our Lord and Savior Christ I am good with...

OK, Sorry if I came across a bit hard. But there are some who come here who just seem intent on making derogatory comments about the Catholic Church and justifying their opinions seems alien to them.

We'll leave it there shall we?

God bless

[Jd34]

Winsom, in a strange way you make me laugh..you remind me of a hard core skeptic and a conspiracy theorist at the same time... Lol... Please don't take offense at that... Its just that I am not a good communicator and after years of education and growth in the spirit I have peace in every aspect of my life. I don't want to feel that same kind of anguish that Peter and Paul must have felt during their disagreements. the effort that I would have to put in to clarifying my position on Catholicism or the Catholic Church is a mute point..Just know that I view the Catholic Church as a positive force. Any church or religion that glorify our Lord and Savior Christ I am good with...

OK, Sorry if I came across a bit hard. But there are some who come here who just seem intent on making derogatory comments about the Catholic Church and justifying their opinions seems alien to them.

We'll leave it there shall we?

God bless

Yes we shall brother. Such a nice breath of fresh air.