The Orthodox church has the seniority

[Eternally Grateful]

But early "catholic church" simply meant the "body of Christ". Baptists, like RBC Howell and JR Graves, often used "catholic" in the same way.

But yes, the Catholic Church came about after Rome declared Christianity the official religion. This is why Roman Catholic and Orthodox Catholic doctrine incorporates a type of paganism in its doctrine (the Catholic Eucharist is one example....but Protestants have somewhat mimicked that one in some ways).

Yes sadly

the reformation caused a great re-awakening. But sadly some brought many of the doctrines with her

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The difference being that at that time, the Catholic Church was the only Church, so of cause it was also considered the “ body of Christ “.




No, you already have the quotes that prove the Catholic Church’s existence before Constantine.
Tertullian in 200 Ad wrote of and earlier time regarding the Catholic Church , the time of Antoninus (138-161 Ad), this is shortly after the death of Ignatius into time after the martyrdom of Polycarp in 155 Ad. Both Catholic Apostolic Fathers.
Like I have said before, only Catholics died in the Roman arenas.

There is also the fact that all these writings are only preserved in and by the Catholic Church. So these histories, letters and accounts are lived Catholic experience.

The Lord’s Supper is not mimicked paganry, you have Jesus own words telling you it is His Body and Blood.

There is no surer thing in Heaven and on Earth than Christ own words, “ Heaven and Earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away “.

Directly denying Christ’s own words and then assigning paganry to them, is a disposition I cannot fathom.

the catholic church, as it stands today. does not hold to the doctrines of Christ. nor does she resemble any of the churches as found in the book of acts.

so how would it have been a real church

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No, your history way off here. Don’t know what books you have deluded yourself with.

Sounds like the erroneous branch theory to me.

or is it you who are off??

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It was Jesus that established Peter as head of the Apostles, not Paul.

Um No

The leaders of the church in Jerusalem were peter James and John.

Peter was never in charge

And God called paul out to send to the gentiles under his own authority.

 

[Cathode]

the catholic church, as it stands today. does not hold to the doctrines of Christ. nor does she resemble any of the churches as found in the book of acts.

so how would it have been a real church

You are brain washed and indoctrinated in the erroneous human founded traditions in the last 500 years.

 

[rockytopva]

You are brain washed and indoctrinated in the erroneous human founded traditions in the last 500 years.

At least the Orthodox church didn't set up structure to control and to dominate everything! The idea of Pope is uniquely Roman Catholic.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You are brain washed and indoctrinated in the erroneous human founded traditions in the last 500 years.

or maybe your brain washed and indoctrinated in the erronious human traditions of the roman catholic church.

come on man. You have to do better than this.. This is no argument to support your case. it just makes you appear what you are saying is wrong with me

 

[Cathode]

Um No

The leaders of the church in Jerusalem were peter James and John.

Peter was never in charge

And God called paul out to send to the gentiles under his own authority.

The reason for the Council in Jerusalem was because God guided Peter directly from Heaven to bring the Gentiles into the Church.
Peter had God given Authority to lead the Church, and no one argued with Peter about what God had done through him. It was shocking to Jewish believers to bring in the Gentiles.
It was Peter who settled the matter speaking first at the Council after deliberation.

Peter is also the only Apostle to be the direct mouthpiece of God The Eternal Father, the Highest Authority.

We also have the testimony of the Fathers, being bishops themselves, they point to the Authority of the Chair of Peter, and the correct understanding of Scripture.

 

[Cathode]

or maybe your brain washed and indoctrinated in the erronious human traditions of the roman catholic church.

come on man. You have to do better than this.. This is no argument to support your case. it just makes you appear what you are saying is wrong with me

History and scripture supports my case, not yours. Do you have the same interpretation of scripture as this Church Father.

“And he says to him again after the resurrection, ‘Feed my sheep.’ It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided.” Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256).

 

[Cathode]

At least the Orthodox church didn't set up structure to control and to dominate everything! The idea of Pope is uniquely Roman Catholic.

The Orthodox are divided amongst themselves, and having no final authority and are in practical schism against each other. They became ethnocentric and nationalistic, so are no longer Catholic or universal manifestly or bear the name Catholic.

The Catholic Church stands in the unity of Peter as established Rock foundation by the Eternal ever lasting Words of Christ.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The reason for the Council in Jerusalem was because God guided Peter directly from Heaven to bring the Gentiles into the Church.
Peter had God given Authority to lead the Church, and no one argued with Peter about what God had done through him. It was shocking to Jewish believers to bring in the Gentiles.
It was Peter who settled the matter speaking first at the Council after deliberation.

Peter is also the only Apostle to be the direct mouthpiece of God The Eternal Father, the Highest Authority.

We also have the testimony of the Fathers, being bishops themselves, they point to the Authority of the Chair of Peter, and the correct understanding of Scripture.

ok. Have you studied the book of Acts?

who was sent to the gentiles. without Peters authority. and he did not even see Peter until he had already went for 3 years?

Jesus always sent out in twos. no matter what. He did not change and only send peter..

 

[Eternally Grateful]

History and scripture supports my case, not yours. Do you have the same interpretation of scripture as this Church Father.

Un no scripture does not.. And history? The jew though History made their case also. they used it to crucify Jesus

“And he says to him again after the resurrection, ‘Feed my sheep.’ It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church’s) oneness.

Um no.

He established himself as head (the cornerstone) and he established the apostles and prophets all as foundation stones.

No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided.” Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (A.D. 251-256).

Peter was never given primacy.

No one thought he replaced Christ as Gods representative on earth.

He was called the rock. but he was not THE ROCK.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The Orthodox are divided amongst themselves, and having no final authority and are in practical schism against each other. They became ethnocentric and nationalistic, so are no longer Catholic or universal manifestly or bear the name Catholic.

The Catholic Church stands in the unity of Peter as established Rock foundation by the Eternal ever lasting Words of Christ.

lol

if they were established by the word. they would follow the word.

 

[Cathode]

ok. Have you studied the book of Acts?

who was sent to the gentiles. without Peters authority. and he did not even see Peter until he had already went for 3 years?

Jesus always sent out in twos. no matter what. He did not change and only send peter..

No one went to the Gentiles until Peter Infallibly guided directly by God brought them into the Church.

“Soon the news reached the apostles and other believers[a] in Judea that the Gentiles had received the word of God. 2 But when Peter arrived back in Jerusalem, the Jewish believers[b] criticized him. 3 “You entered the home of Gentiles [c] and even ate with them!” they said.”

This was a huge no no for any devout Jewish believer.

No one else would have gotten away with this accept Peter, who all knew was given special Authority and Infallible guidance by the Lord.

Read the rest of Acts 11, it was all on Peter’s inspired Authority that the Gentiles were brought into the Church.

 

[JonC]

Churches according to seniority...

1. Messianic -Beginning with the Apostle Peter
2. Gentile - Beginning with the Apostle Paul - Romans 11:13
3. Greek Orthodox -Started by Constantine - Who wanted out of pagan Rome
4. Roman Catholic - The official beginning of the Roman Catholic church occurred in 590 C.E., with Pope Gregory I.
5. Protestant - Beginning with Martin Luther in 1517

I love that you point out the distinction between Jewisg churches and Gentile churches. Often people simply think there was one NT church but each (even each gentile congregation) were different.

A point - Protestant did not start with Luther. Luther followed men like Hus and Wycliffe.

There has always been churches outside of the Catholic Church. Since "Protestant" is not a denomination you have to look at churches themselves.

The earliest denomination would be Congregationalists.

You have (hitting the main ones):

1. Congregationalists (which includes Jewish, Gentile)
2. Greek Orthodox
3. Roman Catholic
4. Lutheran
5. Presbyterian

The reason for this is ecclesiology. Each church is its own intity.

Example - Greek Othodox Church today is not the same church that existed a century ago. Often the building is different, but the building is not the church. Some doctrine is different (doctrine addresses contemporary issues as well as the past), but doctrine is not the church. People are the church.

What you are talking about is tradition (passed down rituals, ways of worship, and doctrines). BUT a congregation starting today has those traditions in Scripture.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No one went to the Gentiles until Peter Infallibly guided directly by God brought them into the Church.

lol.

This just proves you have not studied. but are taught.

acts 9: 15 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”

“Soon the news reached the apostles and other believers[a] in Judea that the Gentiles had received the word of God. 2 But when Peter arrived back in Jerusalem, the Jewish believers[b] criticized him. 3 “You entered the home of Gentiles [c] and even ate with them!” they said.”

This was a huge no no for any devout Jewish believer.

No one else would have gotten away with this accept Peter, who all knew was given special Authority and Infallible guidance by the Lord.

Read the rest of Acts 11, it was all on Peter’s inspired Authority that the Gentiles were brought into the Church.

This does not prove your point

 

[Cathode]

Un no scripture does not.. And history? The jew though History made their case also. they used it to crucify Jesus

Um no.

He established himself as head (the cornerstone) and he established the apostles and prophets all as foundation stones.

Peter was never given primacy.

Christ The Good Shepherd would not entrust His sheep and lambs to anyone but Peter in Scripture.

No one thought he replaced Christ as Gods representative on earth.

He was called the rock. but he was not THE ROCK.

Peter was mouthpiece of the Eternal Father, was the visible Shepherd of Christ’s Church entrusted by Jesus Himself before He ascended into Heaven.

Jesus called Simon Rock, not small stone as false teachers say. Why? Because we know this from Scripture when Peter is called “Cephas” which means large Rock in Hebrew. He was never called “ Evna “ small stone.
This is the twisting of the false teachers that have deluded you, and brainwashed you in error.

 

[Cathode]

lol.

This just proves you have not studied. but are taught.

acts 9: 15 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. 16 For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”

This does not prove your point

When did Paul go and preach to the Gentiles before Peter first brought them into the Church?

Nothing.

Paul was prophesied to go out to the Gentiles, but didn’t do anything until after Peter had first brought them into the Church.

You need to study the scripture, and overcome the brainwashing of human traditions.

 

[rockytopva]

I love that you point out the distinction between Jewisg churches and Gentile churches. Often people simply think there was one NT church but each (even each gentile congregation) were different.

A point - Protestant did not start with Luther. Luther followed men like Hus and Wycliffe.

There has always been churches outside of the Catholic Church. Since "Protestant" is not a denomination you have to look at churches themselves.

The earliest denomination would be Congregationalists.

You have (hitting the main ones):

1. Congregationalists (which includes Jewish, Gentile)
2. Greek Orthodox
3. Roman Catholic
4. Lutheran
5. Presbyterian

The reason for this is ecclesiology. Each church is its own intity.

Example - Greek Othodox Church today is not the same church that existed a century ago. Often the building is different, but the building is not the church. Some doctrine is different (doctrine addresses contemporary issues as well as the past), but doctrine is not the church. People are the church.

What you are talking about is tradition (passed down rituals, ways of worship, and doctrines). BUT a congregation starting today has those traditions in Scripture.

And out of the reformation came the King James Bible... In which i believe God blessed the UK greatly for.

 

[Cathode]

Lets see

the churches of rome. to who Paul wrote the letter to the romans

The church in corinth

the church in ephesus.

there were many churches before the roman catholic church started sometime in the 3rd century

No. Same Catholic Church but different locations.

“And if ever thou art sojourning in cities, inquire not simply where the Lord’s House is (for the other sects of the profane also attempt to call their own dens houses of the Lord), nor merely where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church. For this is the peculiar name of this Holy Church, the mother of us all, which is the spouse of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God.” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 18:23,26 (A.D. 350).