Who founded your church?

jaybird · Feb 1, 2021

Marymog said:
Did Jesus ever tell you to sin?

I don't recall any doctrine The Church has/had telling those men to sin by burning people alive. Can you quote that doctrine for me?

Patient Mary

people were not burned alive for heresy? im not understanding what your saying?

Billy Evmur · Feb 2, 2021

Illuminator said:
We have truckloads of documents called the writings of the Early Church Fathers testifying to succession that you dismiss or ignore. The 11 Apostles who received the command to "teach all nations" did not have jet planes and helicopters. Either the 11 disobeyed the command, or the command was fulfilled through succession. It's plain logic.
It's been proven time and time again, that they are the same. The essence of truths remains, you just deny development.
By this we see a stubborn refusal to accept the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Both sides were to blame, and it wasn't a schism, it was a revolt. This is an anti-Catholic myth. The Council of Trent instituted severe reforms in the practice of granting indulgences, and, because of prior abuses, “in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions” Abuses were never doctrinal. It's been 5 centuries since the Church cleaned up the mess yet ignorant anti-Catholics are still complaining about it.
But the so called reformers didn't listen to anybody, not even each other.
Myths about Indulgences | Catholic Answers

Totally inadequate response, the "severe reforms" came in response to the protest [from whence Protestant] but how can they have fallen that low? those indulgences [licenses to sin] were set by the supposed successor to Peter. Don't you read how Peter dealt with Simon Magus who offered money to the apostles for the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Where was infallibility?

The protest was justified, the "severe reforms" prove it, but they came too late for the schism had already occurred.

But who was the founder of the Catholic church? it was Ignatias, his doctrine of the primacy of the bishops [Episcopalianism] whereby the bishop was to be received and obeyed as though he were the Person of Christ.

The bishops usurped the Headship of Christ and the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the church and with it His gifts and manifestations.

The apostles and Peter were foundations but Christ has always been Head of His church. All who put themselves before Him are robbers and thieves.

As for the supposed succession, no sir, we want to see the historic event of the supposed succession and hear the testimony of those who witnessed it. there are none. It's no good the Catholics drawing up a list of successors 400 years after the event. We don't accept it.

And Peter never claimed primacy, and he was not infallible.

Billy Evmur · Feb 2, 2021

Marymog said:
hi billy. Can you explain
2 Timothy 2:2 which seems to contradict your “nothing about succession” theory?
Or Barnabas?

I am also curious what man taught you your theory? Or are you self taught?

curious Mary

Well for a start it was Paul so are you now claiming a succession for Paul?

Once again we see Paul's teaching is the foundation, it is not to be changed but committed to faithful MEN who will teach others, not to a single person who will have the rulership over the church.

You can't change the foundation, the rock, you can only build upon it.

The Catholics have built a different foundation.

Billy Evmur · Feb 2, 2021

theefaith said:
these are accusations not true facts
Indulgences have nothing to do with forgiveness of sins or salvation by the shilling

but apostolic succession:
Matt 28:19 teach all nations: how could the original apostles accomplish this? There must be successors!

make disciples by baptism:
There must be successors!

behold I Am with you (the apostles) until the end
There must be successors!
Acts one Judas was an apostle and Mathias succeded him

So Christ is not with you? only with apostles, there were 500 people at that gathering and only 11 apostles, Mathias made up the number to 12. Then along came Paul that's 13 and Barnabas was an apostle too.

Billy Evmur · Feb 2, 2021

theefaith said:
there’s another church?

those who did not enter the ark with Noah died, and the church is the ark of salvation outside of all die eternal death
There is no other, Jn 10:16
The ark of Noah is a type of the holy church the ark of salvation

1 Pet 3:20
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us!
(Ark of Noah a type of the church, member of Christ and his church and salvation by baptism!)
(Outside the ark all died and outside the church there is no salvation!)

Yes there is the true church.

theefaith · Feb 2, 2021

Billy Evmur said:
Totally inadequate response, the "severe reforms" came in response to the protest [from whence Protestant] but how can they have fallen that low? those indulgences [licenses to sin] were set by the supposed successor to Peter. Don't you read how Peter dealt with Simon Magus who offered money to the apostles for the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Where was infallibility?

The protest was justified, the "severe reforms" prove it, but they came too late for the schism had already occurred.

But who was the founder of the Catholic church? it was Ignatias, his doctrine of the primacy of the bishops [Episcopalianism] whereby the bishop was to be received and obeyed as though he were the Person of Christ.

The bishops usurped the Headship of Christ and the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the church and with it His gifts and manifestations.

The apostles and Peter were foundations but Christ has always been Head of His church. All who put themselves before Him are robbers and thieves.

As for the supposed succession, no sir, we want to see the historic event of the supposed succession and hear the testimony of those who witnessed it. there are none. It's no good the Catholics drawing up a list of successors 400 years after the event. We don't accept it.

And Peter never claimed primacy, and he was not infallible.

Acts 1:

Billy Evmur said:
Totally inadequate response, the "severe reforms" came in response to the protest [from whence Protestant] but how can they have fallen that low? those indulgences [licenses to sin] were set by the supposed successor to Peter. Don't you read how Peter dealt with Simon Magus who offered money to the apostles for the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Where was infallibility?

The protest was justified, the "severe reforms" prove it, but they came too late for the schism had already occurred.

But who was the founder of the Catholic church? it was Ignatias, his doctrine of the primacy of the bishops [Episcopalianism] whereby the bishop was to be received and obeyed as though he were the Person of Christ.

The bishops usurped the Headship of Christ and the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the church and with it His gifts and manifestations.

The apostles and Peter were foundations but Christ has always been Head of His church. All who put themselves before Him are robbers and thieves.

As for the supposed succession, no sir, we want to see the historic event of the supposed succession and hear the testimony of those who witnessed it. there are none. It's no good the Catholics drawing up a list of successors 400 years after the event. We don't accept it.

And Peter never claimed primacy, and he was not infallible.

acts 1:17 For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.

acts 1:26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

theefaith · Feb 2, 2021

Billy Evmur said:
So Christ is not with you? only with apostles, there were 500 people at that gathering and only 11 apostles, Mathias made up the number to 12. Then along came Paul that's 13 and Barnabas was an apostle too.

Christ is with his church thru the sacraments he instituted

1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

The apostles govern the church or administer the kingdom

Philip James · Feb 2, 2021

Billy Evmur said:
it was Ignatias, his doctrine of the primacy of the bishops [Episcopalianism] whereby the bishop was to be received and obeyed as though he were the Person of Christ.

The bishops usurped the Headship of Christ and the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the church and with it His gifts and manifestations.

Do you think Jesus was a false prophet and a liar?

"Enough from you! The whole community, all of them, are holy; the LORD is in their midst. Why then should you set yourselves over the LORD'S congregation?"

Beware of Korah's rebellion...

Peace be with you!

Marymog · Feb 2, 2021

Billy Evmur said:
Well for a start it was Paul so are you now claiming a succession for Paul?

Once again we see Paul's teaching is the foundation, it is not to be changed but committed to faithful MEN who will teach others, not to a single person who will have the rulership over the church.

You can't change the foundation, the rock, you can only build upon it.

The Catholics have built a different foundation.

Hi Billy,

I am not claiming a succession for Paul. Scripture claims succession of the Apostles in Acts 1:21-26, 1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and how it was administered in 1 Timothy 4:14 and how they were not to be hasty about it in 1 Timothy 5:22.

You are right in that their teaching was "not to be changed but committed to faithful MEN who will teach others". But when those men disagree on that teaching according to Scripture how was that disagreement to be handled Billy? Matthew 18:17 tells us to take it to The Church. That is what happened at the Council of Jerusalem. They took their differences to The Church. The Church (elders of The Church) decided what all Christians are to believe/practice. What Church elder made the statement in Acts 15:11 that affirmed what everyone else believed? It was only ONE person who made that final proclamation!! If there wasn't that one person to make that final proclamation on what all are to believe/practice then the Apostles would still be arguing today. That is why there are several thouasand denominations because men disagreed with The Church and broke away. Then the men that broke away started disagreeing with those me and broke away from that church and so on and so on until we have the mess we have today.

What Church do you obey and do you believe has the authority to treat someone as a pagan or tax collector if they don't adhere to Church teaching?

I agree with you that you can't change the foundation and that it can only be built upon. Clearly thru your studies you have eliminated The Catholic Church as The Church that was built upon that foundation. Have you found The Church that was built upon the teachings of the Apostles?

Also, you did not address my other two question:

I am also curious what man taught you your theory? Or are you self taught?

Mary

Marymog · Feb 2, 2021

jaybird said:
people were not burned alive for heresy? im not understanding what your saying?

dodgeball Jaybird.....I have answered that question MULTIPLE TIMES and I have made it VERY CLEAR what is historically true. If you haven't figured it out yet I feel sorry for you.

Thank you for your time.

jaybird · Feb 2, 2021

Marymog said:
dodgeball Jaybird.....I have answered that question MULTIPLE TIMES and I have made it VERY CLEAR what is historically true. If you haven't figured it out yet I feel sorry for you.

Thank you for your time.

What question are talking about?
Another guy said that we must obey the church because they are obeying Jesus. I asked him if when they burned people alive if they were obeying the command of Jesus.
I never claimed to be under the command of Jesus, when I sin, when I make mistakes, that's me doing that, not Jesus.
Not trying to dodge just don't understand what you're saying. I think there is a miscommunication.

Illuminator · Feb 2, 2021

Billy Evmur said:
Totally inadequate response, the "severe reforms" came in response to the protest [from whence Protestant] but how can they have fallen that low? those indulgences [licenses to sin]

a flat out lie. Your myths have been exposed dozens of times.

to you were set by the supposed successor to Peter. Don't you read how Peter dealt with Simon Magus who offered money to the apostles for the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Where was infallibility?

You are flipping topics because you can't escape the fact that 11 men could not reach "all nations" without succession.

The protest was justified, the "severe reforms" prove it, but they came too late for the schism had already occurred.

So you ignore everything I posted?

But who was the founder of the Catholic church? it was Ignatias, his doctrine of the primacy of the bishops [Episcopalianism] whereby the bishop was to be received and obeyed as though he were the Person of Christ.

An empty assertion with no quotes and no proof.

The bishops usurped the Headship of Christ and the Holy Spirit was withdrawn from the church and with it His gifts and manifestations.

The Mormons, the SDA, the JW's all say the same thing as you.

The apostles and Peter were foundations but Christ has always been Head of His church. All who put themselves before Him are robbers and thieves.

All the validly ordained are not robbers and thieves.

As for the supposed succession, no sir, we want to see the historic event of the supposed succession and hear the testimony of those who witnessed it. there are none.

Click to expand...

Constant denials doesn't change the facts.

It's no good the Catholics drawing up a list of successors 400 years after the event. We don't accept it.

Click to expand...

It's easy, not to mention lazy, to fabricate false history with unending denials of the information we have available.

And Peter never claimed primacy, and he was not infallible.

Click to expand...

We think 1 and 2nd Peter are infallible.

theefaith · Feb 2, 2021

Only Peter and the apostles and their successors have the teaching authority of Christ with the guarantee of the Holy Spirit! Matt 16:18 matt 18:18 matt 28:19 Jn 8:32 Jn 16:13

————

Fathers have care of their children, spiritual fathers care for our souls!

Pope, papa, father, yes spiritual father!

Isa 22 father

Peter head day of the church on earth!

Matt 10:2
First apostle Peter:

Matt 17:27
Jesus and Peter are one:
Jesus even works a miracle to make this point. 27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

Mt 16:18 Peter received the keys of the kingdom: (jurisdictional authority of the universal church) and the power to bind and loose:

Lk 22:32
Peter commanded to confirm his breathren:

Lk 22:32
Jesus prays for Peter:

Jn 21:17
Peter commanded to Feed my sheep:

Matt 10:2
Peter is the prince of the apostles, head of the universal church on earth!

Jn 20:21-23
Peter and the apostles receive the Holy Spirit and the power to forgive sins:

Acts 1:15 1:17 1:26
Peter declares Judas office of apostle valid and vacant and chooses a successor:

Acts 2:14
Peter preaches the first sermon on Pentecost:

Acts 2:38
Peter requires baptism as the outward sign and initiation into the new covenant!

Acts 4:8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,

Acts 5 authority of the apostles verified by them being stricken dead by God verifying Matt 16:18 matt 18:18 whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in heaven and the apostles have the light of the Holy Spirit!

1 Tim 1 Paul is Timothy’s spiritual father.
1 Jn 2:1 little children are adult Christians, John is their spiritual father.

Apostles have Care for our souls
(Acts 20:28 Jn 21:17 Heb 13:17)

theefaith · Feb 2, 2021

Teaching authority of the Apostles and their successors in the church founded in the one true founded by Jesus Christ!

Jesus Christ is the head of the church, (eph 5:23) the body of Christ,
(col 1:18) the new and eternal covenant, (pre-figured Jer 31:31) (Heb 8:8) new covenant replaces the Mosaic covenant, (Heb 8:13) Christ replaces David as king, (Lk 1:32-33) Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and men, (1 Tim 2:5 & Heb 12:24) but a mediator remains on earth mediating between God and His people, but Christ ascended to heaven, (acts 1) before He did He founded His church, on Peter, and the apostles, and their successors!
Mt 16:18 Mt 28:19 Acts 1:17 acts 2:42 acts 8:31 & 35 Lk 10:16 Jn 8:32 Jn 13:20 Jn 16:13
Jn 20:21-22 eph 2:20

We must be taught by Peter, the apostles, and their successors! Lk 10:16 Matt 28:19 Jn 21:17

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Lk 1:4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

Acts 8:30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?

31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

Col 2:7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

————————-

The obedience of faith!

Rom 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name.

Taught the one true faith revealed by Christ to His apostles! Eph 4:5 Jude 1:3

We are not commanded to read and make doctrine for ourselves but obey those who God puts in authority.
——————————-

Successors of Moses!

Matt 23 why does Jesus say to obey the successors of Moses?

The successors of Moses sit in the chair of Moses having the authority of the keys and the power to bind and loose Matt 23 and Jesus commanded them to be obeyed! Then the kingdom was taken from them matt 21:43 and given to Peter, Matt 16:18 the apostles, Matt 18:18 and their successors with the authority of the keys and the power to bind and lose!

Jesus said to obey the authority of the successors of Moses mt 23 authority of the keys and power to bind and loose and this power and authority was taken from them matt and given by Christ to Peter, the apostles and their successors, mt 16:18 18:18 this same authority and power must be obeyed!

mt 28:18-20 all authority is given to Peter, the apostles, and their successors requiring obedience, rom 1:5 obedience to the faith!
And Jesus say to Peter, the apostles, and their successors: behold I am with you even until the end of the world!!!
So the apostles have to remain until the end! Revelation 5:10
And hast made us unto our God kings and Priests: and we shall reign on the earth. Reign with kingdom authority (keys) power (bind loose) matt 16:18
The successors of Peter and the apostles have a valid jurisdictional authority (keys) and power (bind and loose) by Jesus Christ!

Lk 10:16
He who hears you hears me...

John 13:20
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

BreadOfLife · Feb 2, 2021

Behold said:
You just committed the continuing universal deception that the CC teaches, as i had already stated.
And you got it right out of the CC corrupt "bible" that teaches in John 3 that you are born again "OF" water. That's the Douay-Rheims corrupted Bible teaching that you are using.
So, see that Deception??
You just confirmed it, again, as you've told it before, and you'll tell it again, as you are trained to do it.

= You just stated that the "tangible means" of regeneration is water, and that is the CC deception.
So, even in your defense, you have revealed your own deception while trying to hide what your "church" actually teaches.
No doubt its what you'll do again, as what else can you do, except edit your post to try to hide your dishonesty.

Here is a heads up for you....
The blood of Jesus is the ONLY "tangible means" of redemption.
THE BLOOD......never the water.
Got that?
And one more...
Salvation is : "Grace through faith", (Justification BY Faith) = without WATER, without works, without penance, without mary, is How God offers the "free Gift of salvation."
Bottom line.

The MEANS is not the ENDS.
That's where your confusion lies. The means is simply a tool for attaining the ends.

The Bible is crytal clear that we are to be Baptized with WATER and we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). THAT'S why Peter says that this WATER Baptism now SAVES us (1 Pet. 3:21). It's funny how you anti-Water Baptism people make your own rules as you go along.

Good luck with that when you're being judged . . .

As for yout idiotic remarks about the wording in the Douay-Rhiems Version - it's virtually the SAME as your fabled KJV:
John 3:5 (Douay)
Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be BORN AGAIN OF WATER and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 (KJV)
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be BORN OF WATER and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

BreadOfLife · Feb 2, 2021

Renniks said:
Babies are innocent, baptized or not. Sin is an action that can only take place with understanding of right from wrong. Baptizing a baby doesn't guarantee he will be a believer. Circumcisism, like baptism, was a symbol. Circumcision of the penis never really promised a righteous position in God’s eyes, but was just a symbol which demonstrated the need for our love, faith, and dependance in God.

"Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but obeying the commandments of God is everything"
God never commanded infant baptism.

ALL babies have the stainb of Original Sin and therefore, have a fallen nature.
Circumcision was the way that a jewish male entered into the Covenant with God.
Baptism is the way we enter into the NEW Covenant with God.

A Covenant is a BINDING AGREEMENT.
8-day-old Jewish babies entered into a binding agreement with God through the faith of their parents.
Christian babies enter into a binding agreement with God by the faith of their parents.

BreadOfLife · Feb 2, 2021

Truther said:
I did.
I found out the Catholics are supervised by Rome.
The Roman Catholic Church is the RCC.
Your boss sits on a throne in Rome, not heaven.

What's the "Roman" Catholic Church?
The only Catholic Church I know of is "The Catholic Church" - and it's made up of Roman/Latins, Melkites, Byzantines, Maronites, Coptics and about 15 other Liturgical Rites.

Do your homework, dude . . .

BreadOfLife · Feb 2, 2021

Truther said:
Circumcision for their babies was an adult kept sign that the Jewish adults obeyed per being included in the Abrahamic covenant.

The babies had no say in it.

The babies became adults eventually, then they kept the covenant per their babies.

The RCC thinks it is the babies that keep the covenant, not the parents....LOL

Soooooo, the Jews could raise their children in the faith - and that was okay - but Catholics can't??
Is that it?

Your answers are getting more and moire idiotic . . .

Renniks · Feb 2, 2021

BreadOfLife said:
Covenant is a BINDING AGREEMENT.
8-day-old Jewish babies entered into a binding agreement with God through the faith of their parents.
Christian babies enter into a binding agreement with God by the faith of their parents.

Not biblical. Show me where it says babies enter the new covenant by being dunked or sprinkled.

"Who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

"But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code."

Marymog · Feb 2, 2021

Truther said:
The RCC thinks it is the babies that keep the covenant, not the parents....LOL

Can you show me where The Church teaches that "the babies keep the covenant"??? I can't find it. Here is a link to help you out: The Holy See

Who founded your church?

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads