Featured Who is Jesus Christ's true church?

The Canon for practical purposes was firmly established and set in early Church Age, as none of the extar books were ever seen as being inspired!

 

They can also be found in the first King James Version (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Gutenberg Bible (a century before Trent). In fact, these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised them in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles. It is historically demonstrable that Catholics did not add the books, Protestants took them out.

 

Jerome, Mr Vulgate, did not want to include them as being inspired books, but Rome overrode him!

 

Rome overrides you too, Mr. exclamation point on every post
Scholar!!!!!!! Show me some evidence that any 'Baptistic church's you claim existed before the Reformation used only a 66 book version of the bible. You won't because you can't. Too bad, so sad.

 

Good point. However, the early church fathers and Eusebius rejected the apocryphal books as inspired by God. Rome added them, against better judgment.

 

The earliest Church oe!only recognized the same OT Canon as Jews and Jesus did, same as in my Bible!

 

The Holy Spirit overseeded the Canon way before any church council, as Church just received the OT canon of the Jews and Jesus, ours in Protestant bible, and received just inspired books, rejewcting Gospel of Judas, Barnabas etc!

 

Tell us which early church fathers are legit then.

 

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, Jude, James

peace to you

 

James? seriously? can we just drop james 2?

maybe get rid of john epistles

 

I realize there are some who “get rid” of what they don’t understand. No thank you

peace to you

 

Just get rid of those spurious and non inspired books of your Canon!

 

There is a lot of fake history in this post so I will try and dispel as much of it as I can...

You have it completely backwards. The Scriptures they (assuming you are referring to the Bereans) searched were the Greek Septuagint, not the New Testament, which did not yet exist and its compilation was centuries away. The Gospel only existed in spoken form, so what Paul was teaching (that a man named Jesus, who had died and rose from the dead and is the Christ) was extra-Biblical teaching. This account in Acts with the Bereans affirms two things: The validity of the Septuagint (which includes the Deuterocanonical books) and the value of extra-Biblical teachings, both of which violate the modern Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura.

As an aside, what verse from the Septuagint do you think the Bereans would have used to validate St. Paul’s claims? Things to consider...

- Think about who the Bereans were. (They were Greek-speaking Jews)
- Think about what St. Paul was telling them about Jesus —> that He is the Christ who suffered, died and rose again. (Acts 17:3)
- What prophesy in the Old Testament matches this —> stating a man who claims to be the actual Son of God would suffer, be put to death and in the end be triumphant?
- What verse of from Scripture do the Jewish rulers quote to Jesus at the foot of the cross? (cf Luke 23:35)

Is there a verse so explicit as to affirm what St. Paul was telling them? Hint: It's not in the Protestant Bible!

This is also incorrect. Canon referred to which Scriptures could be read at Mass. The reason why the collection of books in the New Testament is called the “New Testament” is because those writings were read when Christians gathered to celebrate the “New Testament”, that is, the Eucharist.

The Gospels did not start the Church. Rather, the Church started the Gospels. The Church did not come out of the Gospels. Rather, the Gospels came out of the Church. The Church preceded the New Testament. The early Christians did not come to believe in Jesus because the Gospels recount the story of Him. Rather, the early Christians wrote down the stories of Jesus because they already believed in it. The Church already believed and her members set down much of these beliefs and traditions in what we call the Gospels.

See —-> Luke 1:1-4

This too is incorrect. Constantine did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire, Theodosius did in 380 A.D. when the Edict of Thessalonica was issued. Furthermore, Constantine was an Arian. Isn’t it curious Arianism did not prevail?

This is also incorrect. The bishop of Rome did not give himself the title Pontiff Maximums. The words mean "chief bridge builder” and it was given to the bishop of Rome after the Roman Empire split into two. The Western emperor, Gracian, bestowed the title on Pope Damasus, who became the first pope to have this title. It was a highly symbolic gesture at the time, signifying the bishop of Rome as the chief bridge builder between the East and West and that religious authority rests not in emperors, but in the bishop of Rome.

As for the veneration of the saints, their commemoration and intercession is contained in the Church's earliest liturgies, some, like the liturgy of Saint James, dates to the first century. Furthermore, early Church architecture testifies to the veneration of the saints as many early Churches had altars over the tombs of the early saints and martyrs.

Lex orandi, lex credendi.

I'm sorry but this is also incorrect. Ever hear of Julian the Apostate? Do you know why he earned that title? After Constantine, the seat of Roman power lie in the East, not West. Logically, the Patriarch of Constantinople should have had the authority you claim. But he didn’t. Why do you think that is?

Furthermore, every early Church history traces the bishop of Rome back to Peter.

Irenaeus, Against Heresies, III.3.3 (c. 175 A.D.) —-> https://books.google.com/books?id=cxIRDAAAQBAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&lpg=PT520&dq=irenaeus against heresies&pg=PT203#v=onepage&q&f=false

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, V.6.1 (c. 323 A.D.) —-> Eusebius

St. Augustine, Letter of Generosus, Epistle 53:2 (c. 400 A.D.) —-> https://books.google.com/books?id=VHPYAAAAMAAJ&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&lpg=PA204&dq=letter to generosus&pg=PA205#v=onepage&q&f=false

Non-sequitur. (Argumentum ad passiones.)

Incorrect again. The Church did not invent purgatory, as it was a belief of the Jews. For example in Jewish faith:

In Judaism, Gehenna is a place of purification where, according to some traditions, most sinners spend up to a year before release.

Regarding the time which purgatory lasts, the accepted opinion of R. Akiba is twelve months; according to R. Johanan b. Nuri, it is only forty-nine days. Both opinions are based upon Isa. lxvi. 23–24: "From one new moon to another and from one Sabbath to another shall all flesh come to worship before Me, and they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched"; the former interpreting the words "from one new moon to another" to signify all the months of a year; the latter interpreting the words "from one Sabbath to another," in accordance with Lev. xxiii. 15–16, to signify seven weeks. During the twelve months, declares the baraita (Tosef., Sanh. xiii. 4–5; R. H. 16b), the souls of the wicked are judged, and after these twelve months are over they are consumed and transformed into ashes under the feet of the righteous (according to Mal. iii. 21 [A. V. iv. 3]), whereas the great seducers and blasphemers are to undergo eternal tortures in Gehenna without cessation (according to Isa. lxvi. 24).

The righteous, however, and, according to some, also the sinners among the people of Israel for whom Abraham intercedes because they bear the Abrahamic sign of the covenant are not harmed by the fire of Gehenna even when they are required to pass through the intermediate state of purgatory ('Er. 19b; Ḥag. 27a).[127]

The Jewish faith. Purgatory - Wikipedia


Part 1 of 2

 

Incorrect again. Vicar means deputy and by definition, a deputy is never superior to the chief. As a reminder, one of the largest Protestant communities in the world calls their pastors, “vicars”.

—-> Vicar (Anglicanism) - Wikipedia

Ever hear of the saints?

The Gospel is not a possession one has locked away in a safe. The Gospel is the proclamation that Jesus was raised from the dead and is Israel's promised Messiah and the Lord of ALL the world. What the Church does possess which others do not is the fullness of truth and the Sacraments, specifically the most Holy Eucharist.


Part 2 of 2

 

What you possess is what Paul would call another and a false Gospel, teaching damnable heresies!

 

What scripture could the Bereans have possibly looked at..I wonder...

Isaiah 53:1-12 Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.

 

Once again, the Gospel is the proclamation that Jesus was raised from the dead and is Israel's promised Messiah and the Lord of ALL the world. Thus, salvation is offered to ALL through Jesus Christ.

Romans 1:16 ---> "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."


This is Christianity 101 and the antithesis of Calvinism which says salvation is NOT available to all, but rather just those who Calvin's God arbitrarily chose to be elect. Thankfully though some Protestants are starting to recognize they have been wrong about St. Paul...

Google ---> N.T. Wright and the New Perspective on Paul movement

 

You struggle with the concept of a universal call to reconciliation and a limited number of people who are actually reconciled.

You want humans to be the deciders of their own reconciliation with God and you hate the idea that God is the decider of with whom he chooses to reconcile.

It's really a control issue. You want control. You hate it when I tell you that God has all the control and humanity is at God's mercy.

Your complaint is with God, not John Calvin.