Where does the Pope get his authority?

[The Learner]

There was no Catholic church in the 3rd century. There were bishops yes, and while some bishops in Rome thought it a good thing that all other cities come under the authority of Rome, the papacy had not yet fully developed. Not until Constantine's move to Istanbul, renaming that city after himself, leaving Rome vacant of a civil ruler, did the bishops step up and take responsibility for secular and religious rule, but in that city only. They had close relationships with Alexandria, but cities like Antioch, Carthage, Milan, and the cities of Asia minor had their own bishops unconnected to Rome until a little later with the enforcement of Easter dates and Sunday sacredness and Trinitarian creeds.

Was Constantine 4th century?

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.

“O Lord God almighty . . . I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever” (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.

“For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water” (First Apol., LXI).

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

“In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever” (n. 7; PG 5.988).
“We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.’ Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.

“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all . . . ‘” (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

“We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.

“If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority . . . There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father” (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).

“For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)

“Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification . . . ” (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

Early Trinitarian Quotes

Part of the reason that the Trinity doctrine was not "officially" taught until the time of the Council of Nicea is that Christianity was illegal

carm.org

 

[The Learner]

Way to many to copy and past, looks like most useful to show the Trinity belief was well before 325 AD.

Trinitarianism in the Church Fathers

Whether the earliest Church Fathers believed in the Trinity or not is a subject for debate. Some of the evidence used to support an early belief in the Trinity are triadic statements (referring to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) from the New Testament and the Church Fathers. The view that the...

encyclopedia.pub

Trinity Quotes from Christian History

Powerful or fascinating Trinity quotes from throughout Christian history.

www.christian-history.org

Trinitarianism in the Early Church - The Gospel Coalition

Coleman Ford overviews the doctrine of the Trinity as its understanding developed in the church during the second through fifth centuries.

www.thegospelcoalition.org

deity christ site:Christian History for Everyman

 

[Brakelite]

Was Constantine 4th century?

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.

“O Lord God almighty . . . I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever” (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).

Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.

“For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water” (First Apol., LXI).

Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

“In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever” (n. 7; PG 5.988).
“We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.’ Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.

“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all . . . ‘” (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.

“We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.

“If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority . . . There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father” (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).

“For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)

“Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification . . . ” (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

Early Trinitarian Quotes

Part of the reason that the Trinity doctrine was not "officially" taught until the time of the Council of Nicea is that Christianity was illegal

carm.org

I'm not against the trinity/Godhead per se, but against man's attempts to define it, then require through the creeds that definition to be the arbiter as to who is or is not a Christian. I think if one deep dives into even the quotes you relate above, one would find differences between the various writers as to what is the trinity, and how the 3 members thereof relate to one another spiritually, substantively, and even soteriologically.
How the doctrine itself was disseminated and established in the various churches after the council of Nicea ought to make any self respecting Christian blush. And that spirit of creedal authority over individual conscience do exists today.

 

[Peterlag]

There was no Catholic church in the 3rd century. There were bishops yes, and while some bishops in Rome thought it a good thing that all other cities come under the authority of Rome, the papacy had not yet fully developed. Not until Constantine's move to Istanbul, renaming that city after himself, leaving Rome vacant of a civil ruler, did the bishops step up and take responsibility for secular and religious rule, but in that city only. They had close relationships with Alexandria, but cities like Antioch, Carthage, Milan, and the cities of Asia minor had their own bishops unconnected to Rome until a little later with the enforcement of Easter dates and Sunday sacredness and Trinitarian creeds.

I believe the same Catholic Pagan thinking was there even before the Apostles were born. It just was not called Catholic yet, and it was not popular and known all over the world until the 3rd or 4th century. But they were there well into the second century. Check the data being taught and it was the same BS. The Trinity which is Pagan goes back many years even before Jesus was born.

 

[Peterlag]

What is it exactly that makes him "Catholic," in your view?

Data like this makes me think he was Catholic...

Both Orthodox and Anglicans contend that Cyprian was a non-papal Catholic, a third-century “episcopalian.” Cyprian held that each bishop is completely in charge of his own diocese and with all other bishops shares responsibility for the unity of the Church. Thus far he was on solid Catholic ground. But then he entered on less solid ground. Cyprian claimed that the unity of the Church is to be preserved by all the bishops unanimously holding the true faith. He never told us what is to be done when bishops disagree over doctrine. He did say that when bishops disagree in matters not involving doctrine, they must simply agree to disagree.

Will the Real St. Cyprian Please Stand?

Eastern Orthodox and Anglican apologists use the writings of Cyprian of Carthage in their arguments against the papacy. What did Cyprian really believe?

www.catholic.com

 

[Peterlag]

1611 AD: The King James Bible Printed; Originally with All 80 Books. The Apocrypha was Officially Removed in 1885 Leaving Only 66 Books. 1782 AD: Robert Aitken's Bible; The First English Lan

The Tyndale Bible (TYN) generally refers to the body of biblical translations by William Tyndale into Early Modern English, made c. 1522–1535. Tyndale's Bible is credited with being the first Bible translation in the English language to work directly from Hebrew and Greek texts, although it relied heavily upon the Latin Vulgate and Luther's German New Testament. Furthermore, it was the first English biblical translation that was mass-produced as a result of new advances in the art of printing.

Tyndale Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Peterlag]

I am still having problems reading yhour post.

Mark (10:45)"Even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many."

ACTS 17:25
KJ21
Neither is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, seeing He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things.
ASV
neither is he served by men’s hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
AMP
nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, because it is He who gives to all [people] life and breath and all things.

being kicked off.

I asked for a verse that says God was a servant. And you give me Mark 10:45 that says the Son of Man. Do you have a verse that says God is a servant?

 

[RedFan]

How do we know which apostolic traditions are true? Were they just added --someone thought it sounded good? something done and not necessary nor was it ordered.

The best answer I can give is consensus development. A practice or a ritual or a tenet that is in currency in the first and early second centuries can more easily be seen as traceable to the original apostles' teachings. As time went by, if something "new" was introduced its faithfulness to original apostolic preaching and thinking would be subjected to challenge -- like any early heresy (there were many!) -- and a majority consensus would eventually develop. Sometimes Scripture would be the clincher, and the consensus was easy to reach. Sometimes it took much more effort (Arianism comes to mind). Eventually, councils were convened.

 

[Brakelite]

(Arianism comes to mind).

Mmm. I wonder if anyone really knows any more what Arius actually taught and believed. I know there's supposed to be some writing of his somewhere that informs us, but is it genuine? His enemies could well have counterfeited something and altered it, or invented something completely different and simply published it under his name.
Ulfilas was defined as Arian. He taught the Gothic people, and even translated the Bible into the Gothic language. The Goths, after converting to Christianity, gained an enviable reputation in the manner they organised themselves, were clean, well mannered, and orderly. And they believed unequivocally that Jesus was the divine Son of God. Yet the Roman church had them destroyed. Arians in the classically understood sense of denying the divinity of Christ and the trinity? No. Perhaps a different understanding of the Godhead, but Ulfilas's writings confirm his beliefs. I think of the Catholics could have altered his work, they would have in order to justify their war against the Goths. Arianism has taken on a life of its own. A despised heresy that supposedly defines a hell bound nominal Christian. I don't doubt there were numerous different sects that denied the divinity of Christ...the manner of His birth...His true identity etc. But did the original Arius? I'm not so sure. Think the Donation of Constantine. A classic forgery that wasn't uncovered for centuries and became the justifying document for the establishment of the papacy and the theft of land and the enrichment of popes that lingers to this day. Who knows what other lies, myths, legends and fairy tales were circulated in those early years in order to bolster power, establish authority, and circumvent law?

 

[RedFan]

Mmm. I wonder if anyone really knows any more what Arius actually taught and believed. I know there's supposed to be some writing of his somewhere that informs us, but is it genuine? His enemies could well have counterfeited something and altered it, or invented something completely different and simply published it under his name.

Fair question. It seems Arius's original writings were largely destroyed. But his contemporary opponents quoted him numerous times in diatribes that have survived. Through this method we have his letter, subscribed by a number of his allies as well, to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria -- as well as Alexander's subsequent letter to other bishops quoting even more of Arius. And we have Arius's letter to his friend Eusebius of Nicodemia, quoted and reproduced by the latter. We also have Arius's Thalia, a poem reproduced by Eusebius of Casearea.

For more, I recommend R.P.C. Hanson’s The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (1988), and Rowan Williams’ Arius: Heresy and Tradition (rev. ed. 2001).

 

[amigo de christo]

a trivia question for all .
if genitals do not DEFINE GENDER
then why does removing or altering them AFFIRM gender .................
how far has insanity went ..................

 

[The Learner]

I'm not against the trinity/Godhead per se, but against man's attempts to define it, then require through the creeds that definition to be the arbiter as to who is or is not a Christian. I think if one deep dives into even the quotes you relate above, one would find differences between the various writers as to what is the trinity, and how the 3 members thereof relate to one another spiritually, substantively, and even soteriologically.
How the doctrine itself was disseminated and established in the various churches after the council of Nicea ought to make any self respecting Christian blush. And that spirit of creedal authority over individual conscience do exists today.

Many examples would be great please, dnaiel

 

[Augustin56]

There was no Catholic church in the 3rd century. There were bishops yes, and while some bishops in Rome thought it a good thing that all other cities come under the authority of Rome, the papacy had not yet fully developed. Not until Constantine's move to Istanbul, renaming that city after himself, leaving Rome vacant of a civil ruler, did the bishops step up and take responsibility for secular and religious rule, but in that city only. They had close relationships with Alexandria, but cities like Antioch, Carthage, Milan, and the cities of Asia minor had their own bishops unconnected to Rome until a little later with the enforcement of Easter dates and Sunday sacredness and Trinitarian creeds.

History failure, Brakelite. You get an F for that assignment. You didn't do your homework.

The Catholic Church is the original Church founded by Christ. St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop of Antioch ordained by St. Peter, was captured by the Romans. While they were transporting him to be martyred for the faith, he wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans around 107-110 A.D. (way before the 3rd century!), referring to the "Catholic Church," not in such a manner as if he were coining the term, but in such a manner in which he fully expected the Smyrnaeans to understand what he was talking about.

It says in paragraph 8, "Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."

See the entire letter here: https://www.orderofstignatius.org/files/Letters/Ignatius_to_Smyrnaeans.pdf

Note: This question may very well be on your final exam. You can still pass the course, but it will take a lot more effort on your part.

 

[The Learner]

I believe the same Catholic Pagan thinking was there even before the Apostles were born. It just was not called Catholic yet, and it was not popular and known all over the world until the 3rd or 4th century. But they were there well into the second century. Check the data being taught and it was the same BS. The Trinity which is Pagan goes back many years even before Jesus was born.

Proof from primary christian sources please

 

[The Learner]

I asked for a verse that says God was a servant. And you give me Mark 10:45 that says the Son of Man. Do you have a verse that says God is a servant?

God giving us life is a service. We know that Jesus is the one who became a servant.

 

[The Learner]

Mmm. I wonder if anyone really knows any more what Arius actually taught and believed. I know there's supposed to be some writing of his somewhere that informs us, but is it genuine? His enemies could well have counterfeited something and altered it, or invented something completely different and simply published it under his name.
Ulfilas was defined as Arian. He taught the Gothic people, and even translated the Bible into the Gothic language. The Goths, after converting to Christianity, gained an enviable reputation in the manner they organised themselves, were clean, well mannered, and orderly. And they believed unequivocally that Jesus was the divine Son of God. Yet the Roman church had them destroyed. Arians in the classically understood sense of denying the divinity of Christ and the trinity? No. Perhaps a different understanding of the Godhead, but Ulfilas's writings confirm his beliefs. I think of the Catholics could have altered his work, they would have in order to justify their war against the Goths. Arianism has taken on a life of its own. A despised heresy that supposedly defines a hell bound nominal Christian. I don't doubt there were numerous different sects that denied the divinity of Christ...the manner of His birth...His true identity etc. But did the original Arius? I'm not so sure. Think the Donation of Constantine. A classic forgery that wasn't uncovered for centuries and became the justifying document for the establishment of the papacy and the theft of land and the enrichment of popes that lingers to this day. Who knows what other lies, myths, legends and fairy tales were circulated in those early years in order to bolster power, establish authority, and circumvent law?

There was to my knowledge only the Codex Argenteus manuscript. Without others to compare it to, one can not claim it was changed. Codex Argenteus, the 'Silver Bible,' UNESCO Memory of the World

 

[The Learner]

Contents of that manuscript
Gospel of Matthew: Matthew 5:15-48; 6:1-32; 7:12-29; 8:1-34; 9:1-38; 10:1,23-42; 11:1-25; 26:70-75; 27:1-19,42-66.
Gospel of John: 5:45-47; 6:1-71; 7:1-53; 8:12-59; 9:1-41; 10:1-42; 11:1-47; 12:1-49; 13:11-38; 14:1-31; 15:1-27; 16:1-33; 17:1-26; 18:1-40; 19:1-13.
Gospel of Luke 1:1-80; 2:2-52; 3:1-38; 4:1-44; 5:1-39; 6:1-49; 7:1-50; 8:1-56; 9:1-62; 10:1-30; 14:9-35; 15:1-32; 16:1-24; 17:3-37; 18:1-43; 19:1-48; 20:1-47.
Gospel of Mark: 1:1-45; 2:1-28; 3:1-35; 4:1-41; 5:1-5; 5-43; 6:1-56; 7:1-37; 8:1-38; 9:1-50; 10:1-52; 11:1-33; 12:1-38; 13:16-29; 14:4-72; 15:1-47; 16:1-12 (+ 16:13-20).

 

[Peterlag]

God giving us life is a service. We know that Jesus is the one who became a servant.

There is no verse anywhere that says God is anybody's servant. Nowhere.

 

[Peterlag]

Proof from primary christian sources please

Just read up on a lot of pagan history and you will see a lot of the same in the Catholics.

 

[Peterlag]

Proof from primary christian sources please.

@Aunty Jane has the history on all that Pagan stuff.