Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
[/b]
Right where it always was--in the first several generations after Christ. It was not any of the various denominations that formed later. Not the RC, EO, Reformed, Anglican, Baptists, etc. But all of these and more are descended as branches from that early church that was not any of them.
If we could be transported back in time, maybe most of us WOULD care to be part of it.
[/b]
Right where it always was--in the first several generations after Christ. It was not any of the various denominations that formed later. Not the RC, EO, Reformed, Anglican, Baptists, etc. But all of these and more are descended as branches from that early church that was not any of them.
My Bible doesn't lie and the visible Church can never end. Jesus said so and to claim otherwise is as unbiblical as not holding to doctrine handed down.
Men who create their own Church or who are their own Church unto themselves do end all the time.
[/b]
Right where it always was--in the first several generations after Christ. It was not any of the various denominations that formed later. Not the RC, EO, Reformed, Anglican, Baptists, etc. But all of these and more are descended as branches from that early church that was not any of them.
If we could be transported back in time, maybe most of us WOULD care to be part of it.
ALready quoted many times Matthew 16.Oh, I think there is something you could do, but simply stating your version of history and scripture as if it were necessarily true won't do it. You'd have to become serious about investigating the facts in order to see where the truth lies. You might be able to convince some of us that Peter was considered infallible or the singular head of worldwide Christianity, and that he passed this on to Linus, and that this was both Jesus' will and was the common knowledge Christians at that time.
But simply stating a theory as if it were truth won't do it. It wouldn't do it if we were talking with Mormons who said that Joseph Smith dug up plates, so why are you a doubter? After all, you were told he did, right?
If he had established the Papacy that could be true.
-
There you go making up scripture again. The Bible does not say that. It says that Peter was to build the church JESUS founded.
Again, not correct according to scripture. The verse does not say "because of." It simply says that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church...which is obviously true since it's still here.
well one can only be the Church if Christ is indeed the head and His Spirit is what unites His body to Him and not any local assembly be it any given name.
So then His Church died off and now we no longer have the Church He said He would remain with til the end of time?
We know.ALready quoted many times Matthew 16.
AND the gates of hell shall not prevail.
What does that mean?
That His Church will not ever preach error.
I agreed with most of what you said, but St Ignatius said...[115 AD thereabouts]'Where the Bishop [singular as in Pope or where any are in the line of succession] is, THERE is the Catholic Church...'
... then your denomination was not the Catholic Church until the 20th century and was invalid before that (a view I find absurd). As you know, "catholic" was and still primarily is an ADJECTIVE that means whole, universal, general, all-embracing. Now, the bishop of the specific diocese in Rome has NEVER been the supreme lord over ALL congregations in the world; it's not even yet been documented that in the 4th century (where we have the first evidence of the first step toward the understanding of Papacy) that he was seen as supreme infallible lord over all congregations of ONE nation: the Roman Empire; so if I take your comment to mean that a Pope is one who is the supreme, powerful, lord over all congregations in every nation - then that was NEVER the case and today AT MOST he is over less than one-fourth of those congregations: suggesting a contradiction to the dogma, not a support of it (although I don't agree with your apologetic here).Catholic means that Church will be universal.
Meaning the Church will be in every nation.
Yes.quote=JoabAnias;All of those and more?
All of them.How many more? 30,000 in the last century?
(As if anyone believes it does)My Bible doesn't lie...
We haven't & we won't - rest assured. When Ezekiel thought he was the only faithful guy in Isreal, the "one true" believer,... God showed him a remnant of 7,000 He had kept to Himself.and the visible Church can never end.
We don't claim otherwise. We claim your monopolization of it is not "unbiblical" as the bible prophesies it, it is "unscriptural" because it defies scriptural truth. Besides, Pope Anicetus already demopnstrated that the Roman rite considers apostolic tradition to be optional on matters of faith.Jesus said so and to claim otherwise is as unbiblical as not holding to doctrine handed down.
And some of them go to questionable means to attain those ends.Men who create their own Church or who are their own Church unto themselves do end all the time.
My Church is still around
AMEN!Christs church is alive and thriving. He is the head and He is the builder of His church.His Spirit is alive and active in the believers life and our relationship with Him and the Father cannot be broken.. For nothing can seperate us from the Love of Christ. We are his bought with His blood and sealed with His Spirit and it is He that is at work in us both to will and work for HIS good pleasure.
If that's what you think, I know I won't be able to dissuade you. However, I've answered the question many times....He founded a church, not a club.That's one reason why the early church took pains NOT to be seen as a mystery cult, but something transcending such exclusivistic members-only sects.So then His Church died off and now we no longer have the Church
And so he has.He said He would remain with til the end of time?
It means that his church will prevail. It has.ALready quoted many times Matthew 16.
AND the gates of hell shall not prevail.
What does that mean?
The Bible does not say that, and the verse in Matt 16 does not say it. You invented that.That His Church will not ever preach error.
He will be with us until the end of the age.Then I will be with you til the consumation of time?
What does that mean?
There will be a continued existence for his church.His Church will have an unending line and continue until time is no more.
Those chosen from all eternity to come to faith and be saved by the blood of Christ. Usually, Catholics like yourself believe we can turn ourselves to God and so find salvation.He said He will shortened the Last Days for the sake of His elect.
What elect?
That's not in scripture.One line will continue onwards til the end, because He already said it would in scriptures.
On the contrary, agreeing with any church, without any evidence, doesn't make it right.Disagreeing with a Church doesn't mean it is wrong. It means you disagree, without evidence of your opinion.
Sure. You're Catholic, I'm Catholic, they're Catholic. All of us are Catholic -- but not necessarily Roman Catholic. All that Ignatius meant was that we aren't part of some Gnostic cult which had different scriptures, didn't believe that Jesus was a true man, or the like. To him, "Catholic" meant NOT being that, but believing in the faith of the Apostles instead.I agreed with most of what you said, but St Ignatius said...[115 AD thereabouts]
'Where the Bishop [singular as in Pope or where any are in the line of succession] is, THERE is the Catholic Church...'
First, he used the word in reference to his own time, not as a prediction of things to come. That was your addition.Catholic means that Church will be universal.
My Church is still around
Greetings Albion. Perhaps there is some confusion on what the CHURCH of today isAnd it's older than the Roman Church, as are the Anglican churches and possibly a few others.
Which leads to that familiar question: "Warrior Angel, when was YOUR church founded?"
There is no evidence that 30,000 churches were founded in the "last century." But if you are referring to the number of different denominations existing, that was already answered for you. As you said there are 115 Methodists (or whatever the exact number you used was), over 300 Roman Catholic churches, hundreds of Baptist churches, etc. Yeh, Christ's church has many different congregations, has many different legal names, and is found in many different countries.All of those and more? How many more? 30,000 in the last century?
No one here has said anything to the contrary.My Bible doesn't lie and the visible Church can never end.
According to what you said in the first paragraph they are, in fact, multiplying fast. Which guess do you want to stick with?men who create their own Church or who are their own Church unto themselves do end all the time.
Greetings Albion. Perhaps there is some confusion on what the CHURCH of today is
http://www.christianforums.com/t7367917/
Give your view of the biblical "The Church" today
Greetings. That can tend to "confuse" non-Christians a lotWell, of course, the word is being used in several senses on this thread, which is perfectly fine in itself. Here, Warrior Angel was using it in the sense she always does--to mean denomination, communion, sect, etc., not the whole body of true believers regardless of formal affiliation, if any, which is the higher and Biblical meaning.
My Church is still around
Would that be the "c"atholic or "C"atholic Church?LLOJ,
Just curious...which of the many Eastern Orthodox Churches have you decided to join (I am assuming you intend formal entry into one of them...maybe I am wrong about that, though)? Some are older and others are younger than the Roman Church, but all trace their heritage to the Catholic Church and the Apostles (at least that is our version of it - others may disagree).
I think we have received plenty of evidence that it tends to confuse Christians, probably more than non-Christians.Greetings. That can tend to "confuse" non-Christians a lot
I would say this thread dost bare that outI think we have received plenty of evidence that it tends to confuse Christians, probably more than non-Christians.
Would that be the "c"atholic or "C"atholic Church?
http://www.christianforums.com/t7367917/
Give your view of the biblical "The Church" today
Soon, however, some local churches did acquire unorthodox beliefs and practices that resulted in their separating themselves from the worldwide Christian Church. The resulting groups were commonly named after their founders, the locations where they arose, or their most distinctive doctrines, practices, or traits. The Montanists were named after their founder Montanus. The Cataphrygians were named after the land of Phrygia. The Docetists were named after their claim that Christ only seemed (Greek, dokein) to be human, and the Quartodecimians were named after their insistence on celebrating Easter on the fourteenth of Nisan even if it did not fall on a Sunday.
By the second half of the first century there were enough separate, particular groups in existence that there needed to be a way to refer to the universal body of Christians constituting the original Church that Christ founded. The term that came into use for designating this all-embracing body was kataholos, which is brought over into English as "Catholic." Though it is often somewhat loosely translated as "universal," it means "according [kata-] to the whole [holos]."
By the early second century, the term "Catholic" was in common use as a designation for Christs Church. A belief or practice was said to be Catholic if it if it was in accord with what Christians as a whole believed or practiced, not just what was taught or done by some particular group that had split off from the Church. Christians who preferred their own views to those of the whole Church were known as heretics (roughly, "opinionated ones"and those who separated from Catholic unity for non-doctrinal reasons were known as schismatics (roughly, "divisive ones" .
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?