JoeT777

I did not want to address you through this post but I had no other option. We were discussing in a separate post and it was highly unfair of someone to terminate that discussion at that point when there were still a whole lot of issues you had not yet addressed and were evading. I think someone has tried to save you. If you want to treat that as an escape route then I would not trouble you and exit. But if not then I request you to join me at a new post called "Which is the true church started by Jesus Christ?" and we shall continue.

inhisservice,
The reason given for turmulated that thread was give that it was getting out of hand.
I was sorry to see it ended also.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inhisservice

JoeT777

I did not want to address you through this post but I had no other option. We were discussing in a separate post and it was highly unfair of someone to terminate that discussion at that point when there were still a whole lot of issues you had not yet addressed and were evading. I think someone has tried to save you. If you want to treat that as an escape route then I would not trouble you and exit. But if not then I request you to join me at a new post called "Which is the true church started by Jesus Christ?" and we shall continue.

---

Try again? A what? An escape route? And where would I escape to? Any suggestions where I can find a Church foretold in prophecy, constituted by Christ, organized by the Apostles as a divine and perfect society, one necessary as a means of salvation, a church visible to the world with principle authority and jurisdiction, a Church with a universal Magisterium, and finally one commissioned by Christ? I can tell you where such a Church exists.

And how does one evade the Truth? And if one does 'evade' truth, does it make Truth any less true? If you were to best me in your 'challenge' would it make the one true Church any less True? It's not me you need to 'challenge' it's the Truth you need to challenge, God's Truth, the Church of Jesus Christ is a slave to it. Have at it kid, knock yourself out, it seems kind of fruitless to me.

But, answer this, if the Catholic Church isn't the one True Church which one is? There can only be one absolute truth, only one infallibly true Church. Don't misread 'infallible' to mean impeccable, we'll waste a bunch of time. Is a Church a building, a group of 2 or more? If so, why does scripture establish a 'Church government' a hierarchy of Bishops, priests, deacons, doctors, and the like? Surly you don't need Bishops for a Church of 2?

JoeT

JoeT,
Good statement AND questions.
I'm anxious to read the answers.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Why ask such a question arcura?

You are here purely to promote your church.

When facts are presented to you that show the sins of your church you call it Catholic bashing and close the discussion.

You cannot discuss the issues because the evidence is overwhelming, not because people "hate" the church because of the name "Catholic".

If you want to claim you are part of the true church of Christ you should be able to discuss the questions of others rather then locking or deleting discussions.

If you are unable to logically discuss an issue it should make you realise you are on the wrong track.

JoeT asked some interesting questions that Catholics praise; let us look at them.

> Any suggestions where I can find a Church foretold in prophecy<
You obviously think the RCC is that church.
Yet you ignore the prophecy that the church would be infiltrated by false teachings and would remain there until the end.

> constituted by Christ<
And you are saying that the RCC which started 200 years after Jesus is that church.

> organized by the Apostles<
And you are saying that the RCC which started 200 years after the Apostles organised their church IS that church.

> a divine and perfect society<
And you do not think you are REALLY stretching the truth just slightly.

> one necessary as a means of salvation<
By the opinion of your church.

> a church visible to the world<
BUT refuses to conform to the morals of even man’s governments, refusing to accept that raping children is a crime, refusing to accept that setting people on fire is actually an act that could only be perpetrated by devil worshippers, not loving Christians.

You prefer to shut down discussions that discuss the factual actions of it’s priests and Pope.

> with principle authority and jurisdiction<
A claim only made by the Catholic Church and cannot be backed up by scripture or history

> a universal Magisterium<
A claim only made by the Catholic Church and cannot be backed up by scripture or history

> one commissioned by Christ<
A claim only made by the Catholic Church and cannot be backed up by scripture or history with a 200 year gap from one to the other

Here is an interesting question
> And how does one evade the Truth?<
Well, from what I see here, you simply lock the discussion or even delete it.

> does it make Truth any less true?<
And that is exactly why the issues will not go away and you will have to continue to ban, lock and delete discussions.

> would it make the one true Church any less True?<
Not at all, but it does show which church is not the Only True Church.

> if the Catholic Church isn’t the one True Church which one is?<
History has shown you would not accept it so there is no point in stating it.

BUT it is a church that was started by Jesus, does not break God’s law or mans, stands spotless in a wicked generation, went underground when the Roman Government told them how they were going to worship God for the Roman Government to take it on as an approved religion, was persecuted rather than persecute, chooses love not war, members lay their life down for others as Jesus did rather than lay down the lives of others because they did not agree with their religious views, members die for their beliefs rather than kill for their beliefs, members who break man’s law are turned in to authorities because to break man’s law is also breaking God’s law, are not dogmatic and proud to say they are infallible, are very poor because they give rather than receive, have no pope or leader because all are equal, are lead by Jesus so have no divisions between then regardless of country or race or custom or tribe, their morals and conduct are guided by the extremely high standards of God rather than their local custom or traditions, there is only the written so lies cannot be passed down, they worship in spirit and truth so do not need symbols and statues and pictures and traditions to help them focus, they follow what Jesus said no matter how hard it is to do, they follow Jesus not to call religious teachers “father”, they do not put unrealistic and unbiblical restraints on people like celibacy, they follow the guidance from Jesus that a Bishop can be married, they do not take on the popular belief that began in the 1600s that a creation day is 24hrs, they follow the bible not philosophy, they are not tossed about by the knowledge of the day, and as Jesus said, by their LOVE you will recognise that they are the real church of Christ, not by their power, riches, pride, and ability to destroy historical facts and documents and even entire religions and town and cities, etc. etc. etc.

The Catholic Church will give you plenty of philosophical reasons and volumes of explanations why they do different to what Jesus said, but the proof is in the pudding; the real only true church is easy to see when you are not blinded by pride and fear. In the least it is blindingly obvious which churches are NOT the true church.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

JoeT asked some interesting questions that Catholics praise; let us look at them.
> Any suggestions where I can find a Church foretold in prophecy<
You obviously think the RCC is that church.
Yet you ignore the prophecy that the church would be infiltrated by false teachings and would remain there until the end.

---

Yes you are correct, we shouldn’t ignore prophecy should we? Prophecies in the Old Testament tell of a future Kingdom holding the authority in the rule of the Messiah; Psalms 2 and 71; Isaiah 9:6 sq. We see that authority in the shepherd that leads his sheep between the fields of Divine Truth (Ezekiel 34:23; 37:24-28)

The Old Testament tells us of the coming of the Kingdom in the Messianic age, i.e. the Church. The Kingdom is meant for the sanctification of the twelve tribes as well as the Gentiles. Even kings are to serve and obey (Psalm 21:28 sq.; 2:7-12; 116:1; Zechariah 9:10). It’s clear that a universal faith and common worship is implied:

“And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be prepared in the top of the mountains, and high above the hills: and people shall flow to it. And many nations shall come in haste, and say: Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob: and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth out of Sion, and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem.” (Micah 4:1-2)

A unified worship, One worship under the authority who teaches and keeps the Divine Truth for all; “And it shall come to pass in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem: half of them to the east sea, and half of them to the last sea: they shall be in summer and in winter. And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day there shall be one Lord, and his name shall be one. “ (Zechariah 14:8)

We see Christ as the first priest of the Kingdom, “The Lord hath sworn, and he will not repent: Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech.” (Psalm 109:4) And that priesthood is institutionalized in the Kingdom, “For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 1:11). The priesthood in this Messianic Kingdom is a continuation of the priesthood in the Old Testament with continued sacrificial offerings; “Thus saith the Lord: if my covenant, with the day can be made void, and my covenant with the night, that there should not be day and night in their season" (Jeremiah 33:20)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> constituted by Christ<
And you are saying that the RCC which started 200 years after Jesus is that church.

---

That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that the Church was constituted by Christ while he walked the earth.

"Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted. “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organized in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> organized by the Apostles<
And you are saying that the RCC which started 200 years after the Apostles organized their church IS that church.

---

Wrong again. It was organized by the Apostles after Christ’s Passion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> a divine and perfect society<
Now, you finally got one right.

>one necessary as a means of salvation<
By the opinion of your church.

---

It is necessary according to Christ’s own words

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> a church visible to the world<
BUT refuses to conform to the morals of even man’s governments, refusing to accept that raping children is a crime, refusing to accept that setting people on fire is actually an act that could only be perpetrated by devil worshippers, not loving Christians.

You prefer to shut down discussions that discuss the factual actions of it’s priests and Pope.

---

Now who’s stretching it?

We expect all the world to be against her Matthew 21:44.

You know, I was once told that the greatness of a man could be measured by the greatness of his enemies. Since the Church is the mystical Body of Christ, it too is like a man, and her enemies are great indeed.

I suppose in your mind her failings rights all the Jim Jones’ in the world? I should further surmise that had it not been for the Catholic Church Jim Jones would have only killed a few?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> with principle authority and jurisdiction<
A claim only made by the Catholic Church and cannot be backed up by scripture or history

---

Matthew 16:15 sqq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> a universal Magisterium<
A claim only made by the Catholic Church and cannot be backed up by scripture or history

---

Her teaching in Christ is to be taught to all mankind,(Matthew 28:19), until the end of time (Matthew 13:49);

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> one commissioned by Christ<
A claim only made by the Catholic Church and cannot be backed up by scripture or history with a 200 year gap from one to the other

---

The precepts for authority are in fact scriptural, the living memory of His words. The Church is constituted for the salvation of the faithful. Its claim as the Messianic Kingdom is the envy of the world. (Cf. Luke 4:21) Christ lays claim to His prophecy as Messianic King, in person, in his ‘real presence’. If you will read your book, you’ll see that Christ claims his universal Kingship in the New Solomon. (Matt 12:6). Lord over the Sabbath (Luke 6:5). The body is animated by the soul, as the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, is animated by its soul the Holy Spirit. When asked by non-Catholics, I explain, Yes, I do place my faith in the Catholic Church, particularly what you call the Roman Catholic Church. I receive in return a direct connection with the Divine, a guide and rule over my faith, along with the administrations of sacraments Christ ordained for His Kingdom of redemption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> And how does one evade the Truth?<
Well, from what I see here, you simply lock the discussion or even delete it.

---

You seem to be doing quite well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> does it make Truth any less true?<
And that is exactly why the issues will not go away and you will have to continue to ban, lock and delete discussions.

> would it make the one true Church any less True?<
Not at all, but it does show which church is not the Only True Church.

---

You can’t debate ‘hidden’ truth? You can't show the hidden truth why sulk?

You’ve complained, whined, pouted, so like where is the proof?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

> BUT it is a church that was started by Jesus, does not break God’s law or mans, stands spotless in a wicked generation, went underground when the Roman Government told them how they were going to worship God for the Roman Government to take it on as an approved religion, was persecuted rather than persecute, chooses love not war, members lay their life down for others as Jesus did rather than lay down the lives of others because they did not agree with their religious views, members die for their beliefs rather than kill for their beliefs, members who break man’s law are turned in to authorities because to break man’s law is also breaking God’s law, are not dogmatic and proud to say they are infallible, are very poor because they give rather than receive, have no pope or leader because all are equal, are lead by Jesus so have no divisions between then regardless of country or race or custom or tribe, their morals and conduct are guided by the extremely high standards of God rather than their local custom or traditions, there is only the written so lies cannot be passed down, they worship in spirit and truth so do not need symbols and statues and pictures and traditions to help them focus, they follow what Jesus said no matter how hard it is to do, they follow Jesus not to call religious teachers “father”, they do not put unrealistic and unbiblical restraints on people like celibacy, they follow the guidance from Jesus that a Bishop can be married, they do not take on the popular belief that began in the 1600s that a creation day is 24hrs, they follow the bible not philosophy, they are not tossed about by the knowledge of the day, and as Jesus said, by their LOVE you will recognise that they are the real church of Christ, not by their power, riches, pride, and ability to destroy historical facts and documents and even entire religions and town and cities, etc. etc. etc.

---

Her's your chance, lets get that truth out. If it's secret, how did you come by it? Where is this truth, and the proof that must follow, that the Church is ‘secret’!! Where’s the beef? Why was the Church on the streets of Jerusalem at Pentecost? Was it hiding under the pavement? Does God promise to protect the Church, even against the gates of hell and then hide it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

>The Catholic Church will give you plenty of philosophical reasons and volumes of explanations why they do different to what Jesus said, but the proof is in the pudding; the real only true church is easy to see when you are not blinded by pride and fear. In the least it is blindingly obvious which churches are NOT the true church.

---

Can you substantiate any of this? This is your hour to shine. Let’s see the pudding, how did the hidden church that nobody knew anything about yet lasted 2,000 years?

It’s my belief that there is a fullness of faith that is only found in the Catholic Church. In fact Paul makes this statement strait out. “And [Christ] is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he may hold the primacy: Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell “(Col 1:18-19) God fills that body with himself, the Mystical Body of Christ, firstborn from the dead that pleases God.

JoeT

>A unified worship<
Which the RCC is not. Forget about the other side of the globe, one RCC priest on this side of town will teach different to the RCC on the other side of town.

>I’m saying that the Church was constituted by Christ while he walked the earth.<
Of course you say that, but it is not true and not backed up by scripture.

>It was organized by the Apostles after Christ’s Passion<
Says who? The RCC of course.

>I was once told that the greatness of a man could be measured by the greatness of his enemies<
The very same argument Hitler would use, but does not mean he was in the right.

An organisation that protects child rapists will obviously have many enemies.

Hitler also did enormous good for Germany which is why he had so much support. Hitler fed the starving and gave food and work to the people. Drug dealers also do a great deal of good so people will think they are good and clean; does not make them good.

>Her teaching in Christ is to be taught to all mankind<
But not by the RCC

>If it's secret, how did you come by it?<
No one said it was secret; you just cannot see it.

>Does God promise to protect the Church, even against the gates of hell and then hide it?<
Yes he does.
Interesting that it was the Pope that said, when trying to justify his deal with Hitler, that he would make a deal with the devil if it meant the preservation of the church. The Pope did not have faith in God to preotect the church.

>Can you substantiate any of this?<
It is in the papers every day, it is even on “60 minutes”. Only the blind faithful cannot see it.

And of course, there is so much evidence you Catholics shut down and lock down any discussion that repeats it.

>how did the hidden church that nobody knew anything about yet lasted 2,000 years?<
The Catholic Church did not succeed in destroying all opposition. People know about it; the RCCC just likes to make everyone think they are the only church.

>It’s my belief that there is a fullness of faith that is only found in the Catholic Church<
Of course you think that, because that is what you are told.

If you believe that a church that slaughters non-believers and sets people on fire and murders people for owning or reading a bible, is the church that Jesus supports, then there is nothing anyone can do for you and there is nothing anyone can say to you.

When one considers such terrible acts as Godly love, that one is truly lost and will never accept reason.

Fred,
As we currently understand the term "church" I'm not sure He did. What I see in the gospels and Acts is a group of believers who banded together for mutual edification, support and sharing of the story of Jesus with others. I don't think he had anything like our current denominations, organizational structures, hierarchies, and all that, in mind when he talked about building his church. I think the focus was on people, not on institutions or organizations. How those people organize and govern themselves is largely a matter of culture and preference.

I know you as a Catholic will disagree somewhat, because you believe in Apostolic Succession. I don't. Obviously, that colors my answer, so take that into account when reading it :)

Meanwhile, I'm waiting for I Newton to break into a chorus of Tom Lehrer's "The Vatican Rag"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

>A unified worship<
Which the RCC is not. Forget about the other side of the globe, one RCC priest on this side of town will teach different to the RCC on the other side of town.

---

This is not correct; it indicates a lack of knowledge regarding the Roman Catholic Church. She teaches the same Truth (God's Truth) taught by the Apostles.

Quote:

---

>I'm saying that the Church was constituted by Christ while he walked the earth.<
Of course you say that, but it is not true and not backed up by scripture.

---

You obviously didn't read my response. I gave scriptural proof. I didn't notice any in any of your responses - did I miss something or were you just expressing an opinion?

Quote:

---

>It was organized by the Apostles after Christ's Passion<
Says who? The RCC of course.

---

Says the scriptures.

Quote:

---

>I was once told that the greatness of a man could be measured by the greatness of his enemies<
The very same argument Hitler would use, but does not mean he was in the right. An organization that protects child rapists will obviously have many enemies.

Hitler also did enormous good for Germany which is why he had so much support. Hitler fed the starving and gave food and work to the people. Drug dealers also do a great deal of good so people will think they are good and clean; does not make them good.

---

You know your comment about Hitler is funny. One of the predominate religions in Germany isn't Catholic but Lutheran. Why didn't the Lutherans and the other Protestant Churches stop Hitler instead of cooperating with him?

The quintessence of the Catholic-hater glosses over hundreds and thousands of cases in the Protestant and Evangelical churches. Here is just one link of what the filth of mankind is capable of, hundreds of cases from just one denomination- I wonder what the statistics would be for some 30,000 denominations: StopBaptistPredators.org

And out of the heart of the Southern Baptist, Evangelical world, Nashville Tennessee we get a little different opinion from this report:

These statistics come from only three insurance underwriters — Church Mutual Insurance Co. GuideOne Insurance Co. and Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Co. Together, they insure 165,495 churches and worship centers (most Protestant Churches are unaffiliated) for liability against child sex abuse and other sexual misconduct, mostly Protestant congregations but a few other faiths as well. They also insure more than 5,500 religious schools, camps and other organizations.

Church Mutual, GuideOne and Brotherhood Mutual each provided statistics on sex abuse claims to The Associated Press, although they did not produce supporting documentation or a way to determine whether the reports were credible. The largest company, Church Mutual, reported an average of about 100 sex abuse cases a year involving minors over the past decade. GuideOne, which has about half the clients of Church Mutual, said it has received an average of 160 reports of sex abuse against minors every year for the past two decades. Brotherhood Mutual said it has received an average of 73 reports of child sex abuse and other sexual misconduct every year for the past 15 years. However, Brotherhood does not specify which victims are younger than 18 so it is impossible to accurately add that to the total cases. 3 insurers shed light on Protestant church sex abuse | Top stories | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

This is just a tip of the iceberg; and it doesn't represent ALL the Protestant insurers in the U.S. underwriting sexual abuse! But, let's look at these statistics as if they represented all of the Protestant clergy abuse; on the average there are about 200 cases per year of abuse by Catholic Priests around the world, while at the same time there are about 300 cases reported each year by just these three Protestant insurance underwriters for only the United States. These statistics indicate a systemic problem in non-Catholic Churches that is being completely ignored. Maybe the Protestants can ask the Pope how they should handle the problem - seems he's doing a good job combating it even when it is found within his own ramparts.

So, where do we go from here? I know, let's talk about how the Catholic hater Jim Jones feed Cool-Aide to a thousand or more. Or, better still, let's talk about how evil affects us all.

Quote:

---

>Her teaching in Christ is to be taught to all mankind<
But not by the RCC

---

Is this out of your ignorance of the Roman Catholic Church or do you have some kind of 'proof'. Remember you wanted space to show 'proof.' I haven't seen any yet.

Quote:

---

>Does God promise to protect the Church, even against the gates of hell and then hide it?<
Yes He does.
Interesting that it was the Pope that said, when trying to justify his deal with Hitler that he would make a deal with the devil if it meant the preservation of the church. The Pope did not have faith in God to protect the church.

---

Does God give promises and then renege on them?

? Can you bring forward anything to substantiate this statement? Or should we go to “60 Minutes” for the 'OUR FAITH HOUR.'

Quote:

---

>Can you substantiate any of this?<
It is in the papers every day, it is even on “60 minutes”. Only the blind faithful cannot see it. And of course, there is so much evidence you Catholics shut down and lock down any discussion that repeats it.

---

You believe everything you see on TV? I don't.

Quote:

---

>how did the hidden church that nobody knew anything about yet lasted 2,000 years?<
The Catholic Church did not succeed in destroying all opposition. People know about it; the RCCC just likes to make everyone think they are the only church.

---

Again, can you bring forward anything to substantiate this statement? I still haven't seen any 'proof.'

Quote:

---

>It's my belief that there is a fullness of faith that is only found in the Catholic Church<
Of course you think that, because that is what you are told.

---

My faith is reasoned, I can actually tell you what I know, what I believe and why. I don't need “60 Minutes” to 'know' with a human certainty. I studied both the history and the scriptures for an 'objective' Truth . From which I've come to believe, unlike the Protestant view, that the Catholic Church is the only infallible basis for the rule of faith. Most Christians, other than Catholic, form distinct groups of likeminded sole judges of the rule of faith. Since each individual has the same rights to 'believe' there can be as many different measures in faith as there are non-Catholic denominations. This produces chaos in the order of faith, a state antithetical to moral order. One and only one faith can be representative of God's [objective truth]. And, I'm equally certain that faith cannot be found on “60 Minutes.”

Quote:

---

If you believe that a church that slaughters non-believers and sets people on fire and murders people for owning or reading a bible, is the church that Jesus supports, then there is nothing anyone can do for you and there is nothing anyone can say to you.
When one considers such terrible acts as Godly love, that one is truly lost and will never accept reason.

---

Why don't you start another thread about the 'slaughter of non-believers?' Then we can talk about the slaughter of Catholics by 'all do good' 'reformers' in the 100-years, or so, of war. We can discuss how the Protestants reformed Catholics by burning them at the stake, how they had Catholics drawn and quartered, how they confiscated their Churches and monasteries. Then we can put on the table how the Protestants performed 'witch hunts' that killed hundreds of thousands. We can extend this to show how it was predominantly Protestants who acted as Hitler's henchmen in concentration camps that killed millions of Jews and Catholics. You do remember that nearly as many Catholics died in Hitler's camps as did Jews, don't you?

What seems to be missing is that Christian faith ought to instill a love of God which, for most of us, starts a quest for the “truth” in our faith; not the a quest for which station '60 Minutes' comes on. That truth is found in the Logos, the Messiah. Further our faith ought to come to the conclusion that “… not only that truth is in [God], but that [God] is truth itself, and the sovereign and first truth. “ Summa Prima Q, 15 a5. Consequently we can conclude that there is an absolute and infallible truth in the will of God. And, our faith must hold belief in Christ's commission of the Church, His appointment of its Vicar, and His pronouncement that that Church will prevail against the Gates of hell. This is because it is Scriptural TRUTH.

Some, such as Thomas Cranmer (1550) along with the Church he fathered (not to mention John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, or Martin Luther) rationalized away obedience in faith taught by God's Kingdom on earth (that is the Church). Instead they rationalized truth to “figurative speeches” requiring a loyalty to a prince of man instead of a Vicar of Christ. Thus, the will of God, the truth, becomes man's will for God's truth. In my opinion this is one of the greatest errors in Protestantism, theological and moral relativism; the subjugation of God's Will to the will of man, i.e. Protestantism.

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

One and only one faith can be representative of God’s absolute truth.

---

No church on earth represents God's absolute truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

No church on earth represents God's absolute truth.

---

Thanks for the correction. I revised 'absolute' to 'objective' which is what was intended here.

JoeT, say what you like about the unity of the RCC but one churches teaches different to the other. It, as usual is only the RCC which likes to claim that it is unified.

You did not give scripture proof of anything. I saw nothing of the word Catholic in your scriptures. So the only ones claiming that the scriptures refer to the RCC is only the RCC.

Where in the scriptures does it say the RCC was organised by the Apostles?
Where does it say the RCC was started by Jesus.
It is only the RCC that make such claims.
Every other religion can claim the very same thing.

>Why didn’t the Lutherans and the other Protestant Churches stop Hitler instead of cooperating with him?<
Because they are just as bad as the RCC, because the RCC is just as bad as the Protestants.

You have just given us all PROOF that the RCC is not the true church, even you admit the RCC is just as bad as the Protestants.

I do not single out RCCs, I point out that they are just as demonic as Protestants. It is Catholics who cry foul when I point this out because they are the ones who consider that because their religion was powerful and rich enough to destroy other religions then they MUST be the true church.

>So, where do we go from here?<
For starters stop burying your head in the sand and open your eyes to the fact that the Catholic Church is no better than and has the same divine authority as the Scouts Club, the local Karate class and all the other Protestant churches.

You said “Her teaching in Christ is to be taught to all mankind”
I said “But not by the RCC”
You said ‘show the proof’.

How much more proof do you need?
You are the one making the claim that it has the authority yet the RCC is not mentioned in the Bible, the only ones making the claim is the RCC, not much proof in support is it.

How much proof do you need?
Jesus said to call no religious teacher ‘Father”, yet that is exactly what your church requires you to call them.

How much proof do you need?
Setting people on fire is not very divine.

How much proof do you need?
Do you deny that the RCC has as much child molestation problems as the Scouts and Protestant churches?

How much proof do you need?
Catholic are always complaining about people complaining about the morals and conduct of the RCC, not exactly a spotless organisation.

How much proof do you need?

> Does God give promises and then renege on them?<
It is only the RCC that claims the RCC was set up Jesus and protected by God. The actions of the RCC prove it has nothing to do with God.

On the other hand, God made a promise to the Israelites and later rejected them when they adopted Pagan practices of other nations, and the RCC has done exactly the same thing.

How much proof do you need?

> One and only one faith can be representative of God’s [objective truth].<
And every other religion says exactly the same thing. Nothing makes your religion any different except for the power it had to burn and murder any opposition until the power of the people became more powerful and the RCC had to try and ‘live’ with it.

> Then we can talk about the slaughter of Catholics<
Yes, of course, back to the argument that the RCC is just as bad as Protestants. Not much of an argument to prove it is the only true church of God.

How is it that to argue that the RCC is just as bad as Protestants is in some way proof it is the only true church of God?

> We can extend this to show how it was predominantly Protestants who acted as Hitler’s henchmen<

Yes, just as bad as Catholics.
And that Hitler was a Catholic that was not excommunicated.

> You do remember that nearly as many Catholics died in Hitler's camps as did Jews<
Not because they were Catholic though.
You do remember that the Pope ordered Hitler to leave Jews alone that had converted to Catholicism.
That was a loving gesture from your leader, ‘Do what you like to Jews but leave the Jews that have converted to Catholicism.’ Mmm very divine indeed.

You seem to have an unfounded hatred for news programs. Just because “60 Minutes” keeps uncovering the terrible actions of the RCC so it is easy for people to know the truth, is no reason to hate it. You should welcome the attention; all publicity is good publicity. If it is wrong the RCC can be vindicated and it is all good news.

> And, our faith must hold belief in Christ’s commission of the Church, His appointment of its Vicar, and His pronouncement that that Church will prevail against the Gates of hell. This is because it is Scriptural TRUTH.<

Mmm yes, but which church, that is the question. It is only the RCC that claims it is this ‘church’.

The actions of the RCC prove it obviously is not.

The actions of the RCC prove it is just as bad as Protestants and Scouts clubs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

JoeT, say what you like about the unity of the RCC but one churches teaches different to the other. It, as usual is only the RCC which likes to claim that it is unified.
[snip]

---

*standard disclaimer* I am not Catholic, nor do I play one on television.

I've attended Catholic services in 3 different states, and have not seen what you describe. Could you give some details from your own observations, or some published accounts? You've got me curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

JoeT, say what you like about the unity of the RCC but one church teaches different to the other. It, as usual is only the RCC which likes to claim that it is unified.

---

Quote:

---

You did not give scripture proof of anything. I saw nothing of the word Catholic in your scriptures. So the only ones claiming that the scriptures refer to the RCC is only the RCC.

---

Ok, I’ll do it again
Peter is made ‘most equal’ among equals. The Church will protected against the gates of hell. The Keys (authority) is given to the Church:

Matt 16: 18-19 And I say to you: That you are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

That authority is reinforced:

Matt 18:18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

Foretold in prophesy, refer to my post #287 https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/christ...ml#post2310321 in this thread.

John the Baptist announced the coming of the Kingdom of God, John 1:29-31. Christ claimed to be the Messiah, Luke 4:21. He further claims these prophecies are fulfilled in Him, Luke 11:31, Christ is more revered than the Temple, Matthew 12:6. The Sabbath belongs to Christ, Luke 6:5. Christ demands faith in Him based on His Divinity, John 6:29. The entire theme of Matthew is Christ teaching the Kingdom of God which is established in Him, Gospel of Matthew. Christ establishes His Law in the following verses Luke 16:16; cf. Matthew 4:23; 9:35; 13:17; 21:43; 24:14; Mark 1:14; Luke 4:43; 8:1; 9:2, 60; 18:17). Christ reveals His doctrine in Matt 13:11.

And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. 2 And the names of the twelve Apostles are these…

Christ then Commissions them and the Church; unpleasant things happen to those who do not hear the words of the Church.

These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter not. 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand. 8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils. Freely have you received, freely give. 9 Do not possess gold, nor silver, nor money in your purses; 10 nor scrip for your journey, nor two coats, nor shoes, nor a staff; for the workman is worthy of his meat. 11 And into whatsoever city or town you shall enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and there abide till you go thence. 12 And when you come into the house, salute it, saying: Peace be to this house. 13 And if that house be worthy, your peace shall come upon it; but if it be not worthy, your peace shall return to you. 14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet. Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Quote:

---

Where in the scriptures does it say the RCC was organized by the Apostles?

---

Order of the disciplines is ‘directed’ in 1 Corinthians 12:28; 16:1; Titus 1:5. Judicial 1 Corinthians 5:5; 2 Corinthians 2:10.

Apostles and Bishops receive supernatural inspiration Acts 13:2; 15:23; 21:11; etc.

In the Epistles of St. Paul (Philippians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus we see a hierarchal relationship between bishops and the Apostles. Timothy and Titus were sent as bishops to Ephesus and to Crete
It is clear from the Titus 1:5-7 that the term presbyter is a ‘Bishop.’ Presbyters form a corporate body in 1 Timothy 4:14 and govern the Church (Cf. 1 Timothy 3:5) wholse duty is to teach, 1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:9. This post of Bishop doesn’t depend on a supernatural gift, they should however be men of good character, 1 Timothy 3:2-7; Titus 1:5-9.

The faithful are to observe an “obedience of faith" Romans 1:5; 15:18 towards the ordained. Whether an angel or the ordained, the faithful are not to preach another doctrine, Galatians 1:8. This involves a claim to infallibility in the teaching of revealed truth.
As to the Apostles, we can take most of the book of Acts to show who and how to ordain priests and Bishops; appointment of presbyters Acts 14:22, injunction to the Thessalonians, 1 Thessalonians 5:12

Quote:

---

>Why didn’t the Lutherans and the other Protestant Churches stop Hitler instead of cooperating with him?<
Because they are just as bad as the RCC, because the RCC is just as bad as the Protestants.

---

That’s reassuring.

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

Some, such as Thomas Cranmer (1550) along with the Church he fathered (not to mention John Wycliffe, Jan Hus, or Martin Luther) rationalized away obedience in faith taught by God’s Kingdom on earth (that is the Church). Instead they rationalized truth to “figurative speeches” requiring a loyalty to a prince of man instead of a Vicar of Christ. Thus, the will of God, the truth, becomes man’s will for God’s truth. In my opinion this is one of the greatest errors in Protestantism, theological and moral relativism; the subjugation of God's Will to the will of man, i.e., Protestantism.

JoeT

---

Hi Joe,

I don't want to seem to be nit-picking here but theological and moral relativism was not a Protestant invention. Relativism was discussed by Plato and his discussions included the famous Euthyphro Dilemma.

The subjugation of God's Will to the will of man has always been evident in Western thinking.

Does God command certain actions because it is morally right? (DIVINE COMMAND THEORY). Or, is it morally right so God commands it? (MORAL RELATIVISM).

As you are no doubt aware Aquinas addresses this problem. The debate is still very much alive after 2,000 years.

I would say that the subjugation of God's Will to the will of man i.e.. a long established philosophical tradition.

Regards

Tut

Ok Joe T, forgive me but I cannot see the RCC mentioned in your “proof” by scripture.

Let’s look at them

Matt 16: 18-19
Mmm… nope.

Matt 18:18
Mmm… ‘fraid not.

John 1:29-31
No RCC there either.

Luke 4:21
Ahh… nope.

Luke 11:31
Hmm… na.

Matthew 12:6
Umm… okay, this is dragging on a little.

Are there maybe any scriptures you like that prove the RCC is the true church started by Jesus?

>That’s reassuring<
That’s reasoning? That’s it? That is what convinces you? Scriptures about Jesus and the apostles gives you the proof you need that that church was actually the RCC? Boy you are easily lead.

Well, here is some news for you, every other religion says exactly the same thing, and their proof is just as Umm … concrete as yours.

Are you actually asking for a verse that includes the words "Roman Catholic Church"? Just want to clarify here...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

Ok Joe T, forgive me but I cannot see the RCC mentioned in your “proof” by scripture.

Let’s look at them

Matt 16: 18-19
Mmm… nope.

Matt 18:18
Mmm… ‘fraid not.

John 1:29-31
No RCC there either.

Luke 4:21
Ahh… nope.

Luke 11:31
Hmm… na.

Matthew 12:6
Umm… okay, this is dragging on a little.

Are there maybe any scriptures you like that prove the RCC is the true church started by Jesus?

>That’s reassuring<
That’s reasoning? That’s it? That is what convinces you? Scriptures about Jesus and the apostles gives you the proof you need that that church was actually the RCC? Boy you are easily lead.

Well, here is some news for you, every other religion says exactly the same thing, and their proof is just as Umm … concrete as yours.

---

Joe said he had scriptural proof that the RCC was the real true church that was set up by Jesus and organised by the apostles.

All he has quoted is scriptures showing that "A" church was set up and claims that this church IS the RCC.

It is stupidity at at it's highest level to even imagine that the scriptures are proof in any way that the church spoken of is actually the RCC.

Nearly every other Christian religion claims exactly the same thing and quotes the very same scriptures, so Joe is only deluding himself if he thinks the scriptures he quoted is 'proof' of the authority given to the RCC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

Joe said he had scriptural proof that the RCC was the real true church that was set up by Jesus and organised by the apostles.

---

I, a Protestant, will agree with Joe that the RCC grew out of the Early Church, but the Church that Jesus spoke of is all Christians.

Quote:

---

Nearly every other Christian religion claims exactly the same thing

---

I disagree. None of the mainstream Protestant churches claim that they are the Early Church. Members of those churches do claim to be part of "the Church," the catholic (universal) Christian Church.

I Newton
Joe did a GOOD job providing discussion and answers from Scripture tio back it up.
You have not.
You have provided no proofs just hearsay or your imagination and opinion.
So let is please see some proofs of what you say about the Catholic Church.
Thanks,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

I Newton
Joe did a GOOD job providing discussion and answers from Scripture tio back it up.
You have not.
You have provided no proofs just hearsay or your imagination and opinion.
So let is please see some proofs of what you say about the Catholic Church.
Thanks,
Fred

---

OK Fred, One simple question. Exactly when was the RCC established/chartered or what ever you want to call it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Newton

All he has quoted is scriptures showing that "A" church was set up and claims that this church IS the RCC.

---

Yes, 'A' Church; 'the' Church whose history intimately identifies it as one and the same 'Roman Catholic Church'. You might have missed the gist of my response; the Roman Catholic Church IS Christ's Kingdom. When a Roman Catholic reads scripture in part he is reading the history of Christendom, the history of the Roman Catholic Church. Christ's role is pivotal (obviously) in that He is the Messianic King. You do recall that Judaism was waiting for the Messianic King? This is a key point made very clear in scripture. Study what that means to a Jew of the day, they were literally waiting for an earthly Divine ruler (assuming they recognized Him). Christ trained his replacements for the Sanhedrin, the Twelve; you might say the old salt lost its savour (Cf. Mat 10:13). To members of the Sanhedrin Christ tells them that the because their service is unprofitable (Cf. Luke 17:10), the Kingdom will be given to other (Cf. Luke 17:21 Matt “What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do? He will come and … will give the vineyard to others.“ (Mark 12:9). He tells Jude, “I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof.” (Matt 21:43).

What profoundly manifests itself in scripture concerning 'Church', i.e. the Kingdom of God, is that Christ commissions, ordains, and sets out a mission for his new Church to serve God, to yield fruits. Thus, in Acts and the epistles we see the organization of that Kingdom into a House of God. “And God indeed hath set some in the church;” A pecking order, an ordering of disciplines; “first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors; after that miracles; then the graces of healing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches. ” (1 Cor 12:28). Furthermore, scripture show a hierarchal relationship when we see that Timothy and Titus are sent to be bishops over Ephesus and Crete, respectively. This was a Catholic 'authority' exercised before the word 'Catholic' was used to describe the Church. What equally important is that the faithful in Christ at that time were obedient in faith to the ordained. (Cf. Rom 1:5; 15:18, Galatians 1:8).

Yes, there is but one true Church of Jesus Christ, the Roman Catholic Church.

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

Yes, there is but one true Church of Jesus Christ, the Roman Catholic Church.

---

Why isn't the RCC named explicitly? That would have been an important pronouncement. Why did Jesus use the nebulous word "Church"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Why isn't the RCC named explicitly? That would have been an important pronouncement. Why did Jesus use the nebulous word "Church"?

---

I don't really think that's a fair question. I have some problems with some of Joe's translation and/or interpretation, but expecting a specific name like that is a bit unreasonable. Obviously there would be development, and the name is just part of it. What it's called isn't really important; what matters is, does the RCC actually represent the church that Jesus established? That's the real question, or so it seems to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

I don't really think that's a fair question. I have some problems with some of Joe's translation and/or interpretation, but expecting a specific name like that is a bit unreasonable. Obviously there would be development, and the name is just part of it. What it's called isn't really important; what matters is, does the RCC actually represent the church that Jesus established? That's the real question, or so it seems to me.

---

I accept what you say. Whilst you were writing, I was Googling around and learned from a number of sites both Catholic and not that "by the middle of the second century all the chief centres of Christianity were headed by bishops, a form of organization that remained universal until the Protestant Reformation." (Wikipedia) The Cambridge History of Christianity, volume 1, 2006, states, "The general consensus among scholars has been that, at the turn of the first and second centuries, local congregations were led by bishops and presbyters whose offices were overlapping or indistinguishable." This article describes the organization of the Early Church: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop

So can we say that's when the RCC became formally organized? Also, can we say before its formal organization, there was no RCC per se?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Why isn't the RCC named explicitly? That would have been an important pronouncement. Why did Jesus use the nebulous word "Church"?

---

The word church is not nebulous, it means the called out ones, it means those who have listened to the message and embraced it. All that was ever asked was belief, all the rest is man's invention

At First it was called just "The Church"
However soon after the Acts history tells us of others who called themselves a church. Those were not founded by the apostles.
So the word "Catholic" meaning universal was added to the name of The Church" to distinguish it from the late comers who were not teaching biblical truths.
That's real authentic history.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

does the RCC actually represent the church that Jesus established? That's the real question, or so it seems to me.

---

I think it ceased to be that representative in the fourth century when it became a state religion. It is easily forgotten that Jesus said you cannot serve God and money. The money came with the state and all the trappings of power. The Church that embrassed that was what became known as the RCC. It is easily forgotten that the word Roman in its title refers to the fact that it was the state church of the Roman empire

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

The word church is not nebulous, it means the called out ones, it means those who have listened to the message and embraced it. All that was ever asked was belief, all the rest is man's invention

---

Okay. "Nebulous" wasn't a good word choice. Check my post just above regarding Early Church history and organization.

paraclete, Th word Roman was added to the Catholic Church name because of the split with the Greek churches.
That's true authentic history.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

paraclete, Th word Roman was added to the Catholic Church name because of the split with the Greek churches.

---

When was that, arcura?

I found this in Wikipedia: "The efficient organization of the Roman Empire became the template for the organisation of the church in the fourth century, particularly after Constantine's Edict of Milan. As the church moved from the shadows of privacy into the public forum it acquired land for churches, burials and clergy."

Before then, it had been independent congregations overseen by bishops. The center of power and authority over all the independent churches became Rome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

paraclete, Th word Roman was added to the Catholic Church name because of the split with the Greek churches.
That's true authentic history.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

---

Fred,
I wasn't aware of that. I thought it had something to do with the bishop of Rome becoming established as pope? Or am I off base here?

Wondergirl,
It was soon after the big split that the name Roman was officially added to the name.
Sorry I have forgotten the year.
You are a wonder for you wonder a lot and well.
I love that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dwashbur

Fred,
I wasn't aware of that. I thought it had something to do with the bishop of Rome becoming established as pope?

---

That's what I found in my Googling during the past hour.

Wondergirl,
The first bishop of Rome was Peter.
Like the other apostles he was a Bishop and in his case the leader of The Church.
However that was not recognized by the Roman Government who were hell bent on stamping out the Christians.
But as Jesus promised, He would be with His Church and the gates of hell would not prevail upon it.
Peace abnd kindness,
Fred

It was in Peter’s Office, i.e. the Pope. There are a number of writings in antiquity, you might recall the several times I listed a dozen or so, where the primacy of Peter is recognized by the Bishops.

If each Bishop was an independent ‘prince,’ how then do we explain the 21 Ecumenical Councils; each one have bearing on our faith, each Ecumenical council is not formally accepted without confirmation of Peter’s Seat, i.e. the Pope. The following is a list of Ecumenical councils; there were also a number of lesser councils and synods which lacked the consensuses of the entire Church, and thus may not have been applicable to the entire Church or may require adoption by an Ecumenical council. Oh, yes. I forgot one; there was a council in Jerusalem which is outlined in Acts. It is obvious that Protestants can’t recognize these councils as anything other than a ‘gathering’ of Bishops. If they did, they’d need to recognize the authority of the Pope.


FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA, Year: 325
COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE, Year: 381
COUNCIL OF EPHESUS, Year: 431
FIRST COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON, Year: 451
SECOND COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE, Year: 553
THIRD COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE, Years: 680-681
SECOND COUNCIL OF NICAEA, Year: 787
FOURTH COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE, Year: 869
FIRST LATERAN COUNCIL, Year: 1123
SECOND LATERAN COUNCIL, Year: 1139
THIRD LATERAN COUNCIL, Year: 1179
FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL, Year: 1215
FIRST COUNCIL OF LYONS, Year: 1245
SECOND COUNCIL OF LYONS, Year: 1274
COUNCIL OF VIENNE, Years: 1311-1313
COUNCIL OF CONSTANCE , Years: 1414-1418
COUNCIL OF BASLE/FERRARA/FLORENCE, Years: 1431-1439
FIFTH LATERAN COUNCIL, Years: 1512-1517
COUNCIL OF TRENT, Years: 1545-1563
FIRST VATICAN COUNCIL, Years: 1869-1870
SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Years: 1962-1965

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeT777

It was in Peter's Office, i.e. the Pope. There are a number of writings in antiquity, you might recall the several times I listed a dozen or so, where the primacy of Peter is recognized by the Bishops.

---

Back up the bus, Joe. What was going on with the Early Church between Jesus' resurrection and 325? Weren't there a number of independent congregations headed by bishops, and gradually large episcopacies were established in Alexandria and Athens and Rome?

Wondergirl,
What went on was that all the bishops recognized Peter as the leader just as the bible and history so indicates.
Read the book On This Rock for a complete showing of Scripture and history.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Wondergirl,
What went on was that all the bishops recognized Peter as the leader just as the bible and history so indicates.
Read the book On This Rock for a complete showing of Scripture and history.

---

Upon this rock by Stephen R. Kay (Ignatius Press)? Is there a secular reference?