How Did Jesus Christ Preserve The New Testement Church?

[saturneptune]

In the Book of Acts, the church is unified in one body with One Spirit, however short of time that lasted. Christ promised to preserve His church. My question is, how do you think He did that?

It is easy to eliminate some of the possibilities without much effort. The easiest is to eliminate the RCC. They were not even organized into a church until about 500 AD. They claim Peter as their first Pope, taking office 500 years before the RCC became an entity. So, they were a church before they were not. The RCC has never entertained the idea that the churches in the NT were local autonomous churches. From the history, edicts and proclomation of Catholic bureaucrats thoughout the centuries, it is quite obvioius that the motivation for existence was money, power, and greed. The "church" had people murdered, executed, and banished because they dare stand up to their false doctrine. Today, the RCC has evolved into a collection of false doctrines, power structures, and a claim that they are the one "true church." LOL. So, this becomes the easiest to dismiss.

Without getting into the doctrines of the Protestant denominations, although light years closer to Scripture than the RCC, the fact is they did not come into existence until sixteenth century.

There is not a denomination called Baptist that came out of the RCC. The vast majority of Baptists today are not arrogant enough without the evidence to claim that their origin is the Apostles (like the RCC, which has no evidence). However, some group or groups of local churches existed along side of the RCC (whenever they started) that mirrored what Christ established as a New Testement church. They followed the Scripture, obeyed the Lord, kept the faith, and faced tremendous persecution. IMO, the Reformation was a positive developement. At least there was some sanity in doctrine bringing much more Scriptural truth than offered by the RCC, although there were differences with these local churches and the main line Protestant groups.

This is not a thread about who mirrors that today. It is about how do you think Jesus Christ preserved His church. Any differences of opinion are appreciated.

 

[The Biblicist]

In the Book of Acts, the church is unified in one body with One Spirit, however short of time that lasted. Christ promised to preserve His church. My question is, how do you think He did that?

It is easy to eliminate some of the possibilities without much effort. The easiest is to eliminate the RCC. They were not even organized into a church until about 500 AD. They claim Peter as their first Pope, taking office 500 years before the RCC became an entity. So, they were a church before they were not. The RCC has never entertained the idea that the churches in the NT were local autonomous churches. From the history, edicts and proclomation of Catholic bureaucrats thoughout the centuries, it is quite obvioius that the motivation for existence was money, power, and greed. The "church" had people murdered, executed, and banished because they dare stand up to their false doctrine. Today, the RCC has evolved into a collection of false doctrines, power structures, and a claim that they are the one "true church." LOL. So, this becomes the easiest to dismiss.

Without getting into the doctrines of the Protestant denominations, although light years closer to Scripture than the RCC, the fact is they did not come into existence until sixteenth century.

There is not a denomination called Baptist that came out of the RCC. The vast majority of Baptists today are not arrogant enough without the evidence to claim that their origin is the Apostles (like the RCC, which has no evidence). However, some group or groups of local churches existed along side of the RCC (whenever they started) that mirrored what Christ established as a New Testement church. They followed the Scripture, obeyed the Lord, kept the faith, and faced tremendous persecution. IMO, the Reformation was a positive developement. At least there was some sanity in doctrine bringing much more Scriptural truth than offered by the RCC, although there were differences with these local churches and the main line Protestant groups.

This is not a thread about who mirrors that today. It is about how do you think Jesus Christ preserved His church. Any differences of opinion are appreciated.

I believe the kind of congregations found in the book of Acts are the same in kind that continued to exist in post-Biblical history among those whom apostate Christianity called "heretics."

The New Testament provides prophetic insights into the future history of both true N.T. Churches and Apostate Christianity.

1. Apostate Christianity would be the persecuter of true Chrisitanity - Jn. 16:1-4; Rev. 17:5

2. Apostate Christianity would falsely accuse, pervert true Christianity as it did Christ - Mt. 5:10-12 if they would call him the Devil and falsey accuse him so they would His followers.

3. Apostate Christianity would make an unholy union with the secular state - Rev. 17-18:4

4. Apostate Christianity would teach obvious condemned errors - 1 Tim. 4:1-5; Gal. 1:8-9; etc.

5. Apostate Christianity would comprise the "many" (Mt. 7:12, 21-23; 13:38) as the true form of Christianity would be "few" (Mt. 7:13) and a "little flock" by comparison to Apostate Christianity and relatively hard to find when Christ comes (Lk. 18:8) in contrast to apostate Chrisitianity.

The New Testament is the history and prophetic prediction of the true churches of Jesus Christ while the ECF's are the history of Apostate Christianity, the materials and view points selected and preserved by the Old Harlot.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I believe the kind of congregations found in the book of Acts are the same in kind that continued to exist in post-Biblical history among those whom apostate Christianity called "heretics."

The New Testament provides prophetic insights into the future history of both true N.T. Churches and Apostate Christianity.

1. Apostate Christianity would be the persecuter of true Chrisitanity - Jn. 16:1-4; Rev. 17:5

2. Apostate Christianity would falsely accuse, pervert true Christianity as it did Christ - Mt. 5:10-12 if they would call him the Devil and falsey accuse him so they would His followers.

3. Apostate Christianity would make an unholy union with the secular state - Rev. 17-18:4

4. Apostate Christianity would teach obvious condemned errors - 1 Tim. 4:1-5; Gal. 1:8-9; etc.

5. Apostate Christianity would comprise the "many" (Mt. 7:12, 21-23; 13:38) as the true form of Christianity would be "few" (Mt. 7:13) and a "little flock" by comparison to Apostate Christianity and relatively hard to find when Christ comes (Lk. 18:8) in contrast to apostate Chrisitianity.

The New Testament is the history and prophetic prediction of the true churches of Jesus Christ while the ECF's are the history of Apostate Christianity, the materials and view points selected and preserved by the Old Harlot.

Who are "ECF's"?

 

[The Biblicist]

Who are "ECF's"?

"Early Church Father's"

 

[Michael Wrenn]

"Early Church Father's"

Well then, I think you are wrong to characterize them as you do and paint them all with a broad brush. Some of them were wrong about things, but some, particularly the early Greek fathers, made valuable contributions. In fact, to the Greek fathers is owed the first systematic theologies, definitions, and formulations of orthodox teaching, as opposed to Gnosticism and other damaging movements.

 

[The Biblicist]

Well then, I think you are wrong to characterize them as you do and paint them all with a broad brush. Some of them were wrong about things, but some, particularly the early Greek fathers, made valuable contributions. In fact, to the Greek fathers is owed the first systematic theologies, definitions, and formulations of orthodox teaching, as opposed to Gnosticism and other damaging movements.

The apostasy is gradual in these earliest writings and progresses rapidly from that point forward.

 

[billwald]

How Did Jesus Christ Preserve The New Testement Church?

The same way God has preserved the Jews and Allah, Islam?

 

[Yeshua1]

How Did Jesus Christ Preserve The New Testement Church?

The same way God has preserved the Jews and Allah, Islam?

God has the true Church in every generation since time of Jesus upon the earth, and they would all those saved by his Grace, and would be part of the real Church, while many would be part of the false church...

its NOT the RCC/Greek orthodox/baptist etc that God protected, that is an organized group of peoples that may/may not be even saved, but he has kept his true teachings/doctrines and his saved peoples since time chrsit left!

And Allah is NOT the God of jesus, its satan under a different name!

 

[WestminsterMan]

In the Book of Acts, the church is unified in one body with One Spirit, however short of time that lasted. Christ promised to preserve His church. My question is, how do you think He did that?

It is easy to eliminate some of the possibilities without much effort. The easiest is to eliminate the RCC. They were not even organized into a church until about 500 AD. They claim Peter as their first Pope, taking office 500 years before the RCC became an entity. So, they were a church before they were not. The RCC has never entertained the idea that the churches in the NT were local autonomous churches. From the history, edicts and proclomation of Catholic bureaucrats thoughout the centuries, it is quite obvioius that the motivation for existence was money, power, and greed. The "church" had people murdered, executed, and banished because they dare stand up to their false doctrine. Today, the RCC has evolved into a collection of false doctrines, power structures, and a claim that they are the one "true church." LOL. So, this becomes the easiest to dismiss.

Without getting into the doctrines of the Protestant denominations, although light years closer to Scripture than the RCC, the fact is they did not come into existence until sixteenth century.

There is not a denomination called Baptist that came out of the RCC. The vast majority of Baptists today are not arrogant enough without the evidence to claim that their origin is the Apostles (like the RCC, which has no evidence). However, some group or groups of local churches existed along side of the RCC (whenever they started) that mirrored what Christ established as a New Testement church. They followed the Scripture, obeyed the Lord, kept the faith, and faced tremendous persecution. IMO, the Reformation was a positive developement. At least there was some sanity in doctrine bringing much more Scriptural truth than offered by the RCC, although there were differences with these local churches and the main line Protestant groups.

This is not a thread about who mirrors that today. It is about how do you think Jesus Christ preserved His church. Any differences of opinion are appreciated.

I think it's very clear from the historical record that the Church was preserved through the Catholic Church.

WM

 

[The Biblicist]

I think it's very clear from the historical record that the Church was preserved through the Catholic Church.

WM

Yes, from the Catholic's own selected and preserved records Rome claims its own name to fame.

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe the kind of congregations found in the book of Acts are the same in kind that continued to exist in post-Biblical history among those whom apostate Christianity called "heretics."

The New Testament provides prophetic insights into the future history of both true N.T. Churches and Apostate Christianity.

1. Apostate Christianity would be the persecuter of true Chrisitanity - Jn. 16:1-4; Rev. 17:5

2. Apostate Christianity would falsely accuse, pervert true Christianity as it did Christ - Mt. 5:10-12 if they would call him the Devil and falsey accuse him so they would His followers.

3. Apostate Christianity would make an unholy union with the secular state - Rev. 17-18:4

4. Apostate Christianity would teach obvious condemned errors - 1 Tim. 4:1-5; Gal. 1:8-9; etc.

5. Apostate Christianity would comprise the "many" (Mt. 7:12, 21-23; 13:38) as the true form of Christianity would be "few" (Mt. 7:13) and a "little flock" by comparison to Apostate Christianity and relatively hard to find when Christ comes (Lk. 18:8) in contrast to apostate Chrisitianity.

The New Testament is the history and prophetic prediction of the true churches of Jesus Christ while the ECF's are the history of Apostate Christianity, the materials and view points selected and preserved by the Old Harlot.

New Testament churches are preserved through obedience to the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20 which is in effect a command to reproduce after their own kind. They were successful and will be successful because Christ promises their success by his own continuing presence with them in this reproduction cycle "and lo, I will be with you always, even unto the end of the world."

 

[saturneptune]

I think it's very clear from the historical record that the Church was preserved through the Catholic Church.

WM

LOL. Sure it was. First of all, the RCC has every characteristic of the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3. Aside from that, they have built a secular hierarchy that is as corrupt as any secular government. The NT church is preserved by local autonomous churches that obey the Bible. Lets see, if the RCC is the preserved church, it has these characteristics

1. Go through a sinful, probably sexual pervert, priest to confess sins
2. Sell Holy Water
3. Play with Rosary beads
4. Pray to Peter, Paul, Mary, and Puff the Magic Dragon
5. Treat the Lord's Supper like a magic act, two, four, six, eight, time to transsubstantiate
6. Claim Peter as your first Pope when the church did not start until 500 AD
7. Add uninspired books to Scripture like Macabees
8. Use commentary of Catholic bureaucrats to add to the Inspired Scripture
9. Have a history of murdering Protestants and Baptists

Need I go on? The Pope would look much better with a propeller on his beanie cap. Ave Maria, gee its good to see ya.

 

[WestminsterMan]

LOL. Sure it was. First of all, the RCC has every characteristic of the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3. Aside from that, they have built a secular hierarchy that is as corrupt as any secular government. The NT church is preserved by local autonomous churches that obey the Bible. Lets see, if the RCC is the preserved church, it has these characteristics

1. Go through a sinful, probably sexual pervert, priest to confess sins
2. Sell Holy Water
3. Play with Rosary beads
4. Pray to Peter, Paul, Mary, and Puff the Magic Dragon
5. Treat the Lord's Supper like a magic act, two, four, six, eight, time to transsubstantiate
6. Claim Peter as your first Pope when the church did not start until 500 AD
7. Add uninspired books to Scripture like Macabees
8. Use commentary of Catholic bureaucrats to add to the Inspired Scripture
9. Have a history of murdering Protestants and Baptists

Need I go on? The Pope would look much better with a propeller on his beanie cap. Ave Maria, gee its good to see ya.

Brilliant retort.... None of the garbage that you spew means a thing - just more biggoted hateful empty rhetoric.

WM

 

[Zenas]

LOL. Sure it was. First of all, the RCC has every characteristic of the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3. Aside from that, they have built a secular hierarchy that is as corrupt as any secular government. The NT church is preserved by local autonomous churches that obey the Bible. Lets see, if the RCC is the preserved church, it has these characteristics


6. Claim Peter as your first Pope when the church did not start until 500 AD


Need I go on? The Pope would look much better with a propeller on his beanie cap. Ave Maria, gee its good to see ya.

I'll accept your attempts at humor here (and some of them actually are funny). But where do you get the idea that the church did not start until 500 AD? I ask this because I have seen it said before, but no one has pointed out the event or events that lead to the beginning of the Catholic Church. By comparison, we can know the very day in history that the Lutheran Church, or the Anglican Church, or the Church of Christ began. We can also show the history behind the beginnings of the Baptist churches and the persons involved in their establishment. But I have not heard the history behind the beginning of the Catholic Church, who was its founder, or what group did they break away from. Can you tell me?

 

[saturneptune]

I'll accept your attempts at humor here (and some of them actually are funny). But where do you get the idea that the church did not start until 500 AD? I ask this because I have seen it said before, but no one has pointed out the event or events that lead to the beginning of the Catholic Church. By comparison, we can know the very day in history that the Lutheran Church, or the Anglican Church, or the Church of Christ began. We can also show the history behind the beginnings of the Baptist churches and the persons involved in their establishment. But I have not heard the history behind the beginning of the Catholic Church, who was its founder, or what group did they break away from. Can you tell me?

Here is a summary:
The Roman Catholic Church claims to have started in Matthew 16:18 when Christ supposedly appointed Peter as the first Pope. However, the honest and objective student of the Scriptures and history soon discovers that the foundation of the Roman church is none other than the pagan mystery religion of ancient Babylon.

While enduring the early persecutions of the Roman government (65-300 A.D.), most of professing Christianity went through a gradual departure from New Testament doctrine concerning church government, worship and practice. Local churches ceased to be autonomous by giving way to the control of "bishops" ruling over hierarchies. The simple form of worship from the heart was replaced with the rituals and splendor of paganism. Ministers became "priests," and pagans became "Christians" by simply being sprinkled with water. This tolerance of an unregenerate membership only made things worse. SPRINKLED PAGANISM is about the best definition for Roman Catholicism.

The Roman Emperor Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313 A.D., which made this new "Christianity" the official religion of the Roman Empire. The first actual Pope in Rome was probably Leo I (440-461 A.D.), although some claim that Gregory I was the first (590-604 A.D.). This ungodly system eventually ushered in the darkest period of history known to man, properly known as the "Dark Ages" (500-1500 A.D.). Through popes, bishops, and priests, Satan ruled Europe, and Biblical Christianity became illegal.

Throughout all of this, however, there remained individual groups of true Christians, such as the Waldensens and the Anabaptists who would not conform to the Roman system.

Here is the full source:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/Catholic.html

Do not get me wrong. I am not a Landmarker. The fact is that Jesus Christ preserved his NT church in some manner. Now, obviously, it was not the RCC, even if Peter was the first pope. As history shows, the modern RCC have no claim until about 500 AD, and even then, it was an apostate church.

I believe that the church was preserved before the Reformation through small, autonomous churches of various groups not connected with the RCC. The RCC has always been connected with secular governments of various types, and have resorted to murder to those who disagreed with their agenda, both Protestant and Baptist.

I do believe the modern day Baptist faith to be the result of those small autonomous churches that opposed the RCC for over one thousand years.

 

[saturneptune]

Brilliant retort.... None of the garbage that you spew means a thing - just more biggoted hateful empty rhetoric.

WM

Nope, it is quite well founded, and you are not going to get by with your nonsense here.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Here is a summary:
The Roman Catholic Church claims to have started in Matthew 16:18 when Christ supposedly appointed Peter as the first Pope. However, the honest and objective student of the Scriptures and history soon discovers that the foundation of the Roman church is none other than the pagan mystery religion of ancient Babylon.

While enduring the early persecutions of the Roman government (65-300 A.D.), most of professing Christianity went through a gradual departure from New Testament doctrine concerning church government, worship and practice. Local churches ceased to be autonomous by giving way to the control of "bishops" ruling over hierarchies. The simple form of worship from the heart was replaced with the rituals and splendor of paganism. Ministers became "priests," and pagans became "Christians" by simply being sprinkled with water. This tolerance of an unregenerate membership only made things worse. SPRINKLED PAGANISM is about the best definition for Roman Catholicism.

The Roman Emperor Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313 A.D., which made this new "Christianity" the official religion of the Roman Empire. The first actual Pope in Rome was probably Leo I (440-461 A.D.), although some claim that Gregory I was the first (590-604 A.D.). This ungodly system eventually ushered in the darkest period of history known to man, properly known as the "Dark Ages" (500-1500 A.D.). Through popes, bishops, and priests, Satan ruled Europe, and Biblical Christianity became illegal.

Throughout all of this, however, there remained individual groups of true Christians, such as the Waldensens and the Anabaptists who would not conform to the Roman system.

Here is the full source:

http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/Catholic.html

Do not get me wrong. I am not a Landmarker. The fact is that Jesus Christ preserved his NT church in some manner. Now, obviously, it was not the RCC, even if Peter was the first pope. As history shows, the modern RCC have no claim until about 500 AD, and even then, it was an apostate church.

I believe that the church was preserved before the Reformation through small, autonomous churches of various groups not connected with the RCC. The RCC has always been connected with secular governments of various types, and have resorted to murder to those who disagreed with their agenda, both Protestant and Baptist.

I do believe the modern day Baptist faith to be the result of those small autonomous churches that opposed the RCC for over one thousand years.

I think you are essentially correct. I would add this: The Magisterial Protestants -- Latin cousins of the RCC -- were no better; they murdered Anabaptists and other Dissenters. They even murdered Roman Catholics. So, here we had the RCC and the Magisterial Protestants murdering each other and Anabaptists and other Dissenters in the name of Jesus. Yep, they were surely followers of Jesus, murdering as they did in His name and advancing His kingdom by the sword.

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe the kind of congregations found in the book of Acts are the same in kind that continued to exist in post-Biblical history among those whom apostate Christianity called "heretics."

The New Testament provides prophetic insights into the future history of both true N.T. Churches and Apostate Christianity.

1. Apostate Christianity would be the persecuter of true Chrisitanity - Jn. 16:1-4; Rev. 17:5

2. Apostate Christianity would falsely accuse, pervert true Christianity as it did Christ - Mt. 5:10-12 if they would call him the Devil and falsey accuse him so they would His followers.

3. Apostate Christianity would make an unholy union with the secular state - Rev. 17-18:4

4. Apostate Christianity would teach obvious condemned errors - 1 Tim. 4:1-5; Gal. 1:8-9; etc.

5. Apostate Christianity would comprise the "many" (Mt. 7:12, 21-23; 13:38) as the true form of Christianity would be "few" (Mt. 7:13) and a "little flock" by comparison to Apostate Christianity and relatively hard to find when Christ comes (Lk. 18:8) in contrast to apostate Chrisitianity.

The New Testament is the history and prophetic prediction of the true churches of Jesus Christ while the ECF's are the history of Apostate Christianity, the materials and view points selected and preserved by the Old Harlot.

Again, the Harlot Rome is clearly characterized in the Scriptures and predicted along with her protestant daughters as murders of the people of God (Jn. 16:1-4; Rev. 17:5).

At the very minimum the true churches of Christ are NEVER ONCE characterized as murder's of other religous people but the very reverse. We separate from heretics but do no murder them or merge with the secular state and use the secular arm to murder those who oppose our doctrine.

 

[Yeshua1]

Again, the Harlot Rome is clearly characterized in the Scriptures and predicted along with her protestant daughters as murders of the people of God (Jn. 16:1-4; Rev. 17:5).

At the very minimum the true churches of Christ are NEVER ONCE characterized as murder's of other religous people but the very reverse. We separate from heretics but do no murder them or merge with the secular state and use the secular arm to murder those who oppose our doctrine.

We have to get away from mindset that Jesus said a particular 'church" would be perserved, that it was catholic/baptist etc...

He meant to me that God would be faithful to perserve a faithful remnant out from sinful humanity, that they would those those saved by him, and would stay true to the true Gospel and Bible!

they would be found residing in baptist and other churches throughout history....

 

[billwald]

The Church is unified through communion and the ecumenical creeds. You Baptists are "Christian" to the extent that you confirm the statements of the ecumenical creeds. Most of you reword most of the creedal statements in your humanly devised "statements of faith." Seems silly that you must "re-invent the wheel" in every local congregation.

You all do have communion, don't you?