Sola Scriptura - does this foundation make you a heretic

[epostle1]

Kepha, I agree but disagree.
What you say above is true and tradition was passed on.
1 Corinthians 11:2 tells us that we are to keep the ordinances that Paul had delivered to us.
2 Thessalonians 2:15 tells us to heed the traditions that have been passed down.

This is all well and good.
I have a problem with changes that were made after the pre-Nicene fathers. For instance, Augustine decided that infants should be baptized.
What gave him such power when the other ECF did not even agree with him? I've never understood this.

I DO understand why infants are baptized, but I don't agree with it because God, being a just God, will not hold anyone responsible for their sin unless they're aware of it. This also goes for persons with mental problems such as autism, etc.

I do wish the CC had remained as it was in the pre-Nicene era.
There is so much to be learned from these men. I quote them many times but I'm told they're not inspired. Which is interesting -- as if those that teach wrong doctrine are.

Just a thought.

There were no changes made. All the ECF were unanimous on infant baptism. Augustine clarified what was always there, he didn't "decide" on infant baptism. The topic is sola scriptura.
No ECF is inspired. Even infallible declarations are not inspired. Only scripture is inspired. It is impossible for the Church to teach wrong doctrines. It's perceptions that are wrong. We are getting way off course here.

 

[epostle1]

Holy War
Further information: Holy war § Christianity, and Crusades
In 1095, at the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II declared that some wars could be deemed as not only a bellum iustum ("just war"), but could, in certain cases, rise to the level of a bellum sacrum (holy war).[36] ...
Thomas Murphy examined the Christian concept of Holy War, asking "how a culture formally dedicated to fulfilling the injunction to 'love thy neighbor as thyself' could move to a point where it sanctioned the use of violence against the alien both outside and inside society".
The religious sanctioning of the concept of "holy war" was a turning point in Christian attitudes towards violence; "Pope Gregory VII made the Holy War possible by drastically altering the attitude of the church towards war... Hitherto a knight could obtain remission of sins only by giving up arms, but Urban invited him to gain forgiveness 'in and through the exercise of his martial skills'." A holy war was defined by the Roman Catholic Church as "war that is not only just, but justifying; that is, a war that confers positive spiritual merit on those who fight in it".

The Inquisition is a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy[46] The Spanish Inquisition is often cited in popular literature and history as an example of Catholic intolerance and repression. The total number of people who were processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 of them were put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the actual death toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively.[citation needed] It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 people were executed.[47] About 50 people were executed by the Mexican Inquisition.[48] Included in that total are 29 people who were executed as "Judaizers" between 1571 and 1700 out of 324 people who were prosecuted for practicing the Jewish religion.[49]

In the Portuguese Inquisition the major targets were those who had converted from Judaism to Catholicism, the Conversos, also known as New Christians or Marranos, were suspected of secretly practising Judaism. Many of these were originally Spanish Jews, who had left Spain for Portugal. The number of victims is estimated to be around 40,000.[50][51] One particular focus of the Spanish and Portuguese inquisitions was the issue of Jewish anusim and Muslim converts to Catholicism, partly because these minority groups were more numerous in Spain and Portugal than they were in many other parts of Europe, and partly because they were often considered suspect due to the assumption that they had secretly reverted to their previous religions. The Goa Inquisition was the office of the Portuguese Inquisition acting in Portuguese India, and in the rest of the Portuguese Empire in Asia. It was established in 1560, briefly suppressed from 1774–1778, and finally abolished in 1812.[52] Based on the records that survive, H. P. Salomon and Rabbi Isaac S.D. Sassoon state that between the Inquisition's beginning in 1561 and its temporary abolition in 1774, some 16,202 persons were brought to trial by the Inquisition. Of this number, it is known that 57 were sentenced to death and executed, and another 64 were burned in effigy (this sentence was applied to those who had fled or died in prison; in the latter case, the remains were burned in a coffin at the same time as the effigy).[53] Others were subjected to lesser punishments or penance, but the fate of many of those who were tried by the Inquisition is unknown.[54]

The Roman Inquisition, during the second half of the 16th century, was responsible for prosecuting individuals accused of a wide array of crimes relating to religious doctrine or alternate religious doctrine or alternate religious beliefs. Out of 51,000 — 75,000 cases judged by the Inquisition in Italy after 1542, around 1,250 resulted in a death sentence.[55]

The legal basis for some inquisitorial activity came from Pope Innocent IV's papal bull Ad extirpanda of 1252, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.[63] By 1256, inquisitors were given absolution if they used instruments of torture.
Christianity and violence - Wikipedia

Does this sound like Christ like behavior or thinking?

The Protestant Inquisition was worse. You don't want to me to disprove the unbiblical, unworkable, illogical, unhisorical man made tradition of sola scriptura so you throw up this rant, as if these things happened yesterday.

 

[epostle1]

GG I gave a reference that the CC "believes" they have the authority to change the teachings of Christ.
I am firm in my understanding that no such authority exists.
Let us begin with this answer in your next question.
You THINK Christ was resurrected on Sunday right. Now all I would ask is what scripture states this.
All the scriptures I have dealt with in the original languages state that Christ was already risen by the time they discovered he was no longer dead on the first day of the week. Would there be any particular reason why he could not have risen on the Saturday prior to the first day of the week? Since all Jews including every apostle were honoring the Fathers seventh day rest there would have been no one going to look right? Christ states that he is the lord of the Sabbath right? so let's look at the context of what he meant when he made that statement;
Mark 2:23 And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. 24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? 25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him? 26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? 27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: 28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Christ's remark about being the Lord of the Sabbath day was in regard to what was considered lawful to do on it not whether it was falling on the right day of the week. I would further note that if there had been any intent by Christ to change his Fathers Holy day of rest that would have been the perfect time to let all the faithful know.
Now of course if Christ were to have authorized such a change then wouldn't it have been prudent that all the apostles follow it? and yet in verse after verse none of the apostles ever alludes to any change in their understanding of what day of the week that they held to be the Sabbath. Acts 13:14, 27, 42–44; 15:21; 16:13; 17:2; and 18:4. Acts 13:42–44
So if Christ had changed his Fathers holy day to another why would it take hundreds of years to be forced into effect.... in fact the better question would be why would it have to be forced.

“On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)

The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).

According to this church if I observe Saturday I am cut off.... how Christian does that sound to you?
I have agreement with you that the churches who split off from Catholicism are in error but, my basis on this understanding is that when they split off they still carried along some of the error that had been already inherent with the original church and they just continued to go further into error.
The Jewish nation showed us that no church of God is immune to the influx of error when the will of man can be used to alter its intent and the CC has had a long time for alteration to infuse itself within it.

I have this perspective not because I am out to get anyone but rather as I review history and see how the fruits have manifested from the interactions between church and people I do not see the God I love in them.

I can participate on Saturday late afternoon Mass and fulfill my Sunday obligation. You make a lot of noise over nothing.

 

[epostle1]

On the other hand we have the declarations of man;
The Pope has the power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even the precepts of Christ. The Pope has the authority and often exercised it, to dispense with the command of Christ." (Decretal, de Tranlatic Episcop. (The pope can modify divine law) Ferraris' Ecclesiastical Dictionary)

"The authority of the Church could therefore not be bound to the authority of the Scriptures, because the church had changed the Sabbath into Sunday, not by command of Christ, but by it's own authority." (Canon and Tradition. page 263)

"The doctrines of the Catholic Church are entirely independent of Holy Scripture." (Familiar Explanation of Catholic Doctrine. Rev. M Muller, page 151)

Provide a link. These are phony anti-Catholic sources.

 

[GodsGrace]

Holy War
Further information: Holy war § Christianity, and Crusades
In 1095, at the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II declared that some wars could be deemed as not only a bellum iustum ("just war"), but could, in certain cases, rise to the level of a bellum sacrum (holy war).[36] ...
Thomas Murphy examined the Christian concept of Holy War, asking "how a culture formally dedicated to fulfilling the injunction to 'love thy neighbor as thyself' could move to a point where it sanctioned the use of violence against the alien both outside and inside society".
The religious sanctioning of the concept of "holy war" was a turning point in Christian attitudes towards violence; "Pope Gregory VII made the Holy War possible by drastically altering the attitude of the church towards war... Hitherto a knight could obtain remission of sins only by giving up arms, but Urban invited him to gain forgiveness 'in and through the exercise of his martial skills'." A holy war was defined by the Roman Catholic Church as "war that is not only just, but justifying; that is, a war that confers positive spiritual merit on those who fight in it".

The Inquisition is a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy[46] The Spanish Inquisition is often cited in popular literature and history as an example of Catholic intolerance and repression. The total number of people who were processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 of them were put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the actual death toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively.[citation needed] It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 people were executed.[47] About 50 people were executed by the Mexican Inquisition.[48] Included in that total are 29 people who were executed as "Judaizers" between 1571 and 1700 out of 324 people who were prosecuted for practicing the Jewish religion.[49]

In the Portuguese Inquisition the major targets were those who had converted from Judaism to Catholicism, the Conversos, also known as New Christians or Marranos, were suspected of secretly practising Judaism. Many of these were originally Spanish Jews, who had left Spain for Portugal. The number of victims is estimated to be around 40,000.[50][51] One particular focus of the Spanish and Portuguese inquisitions was the issue of Jewish anusim and Muslim converts to Catholicism, partly because these minority groups were more numerous in Spain and Portugal than they were in many other parts of Europe, and partly because they were often considered suspect due to the assumption that they had secretly reverted to their previous religions. The Goa Inquisition was the office of the Portuguese Inquisition acting in Portuguese India, and in the rest of the Portuguese Empire in Asia. It was established in 1560, briefly suppressed from 1774–1778, and finally abolished in 1812.[52] Based on the records that survive, H. P. Salomon and Rabbi Isaac S.D. Sassoon state that between the Inquisition's beginning in 1561 and its temporary abolition in 1774, some 16,202 persons were brought to trial by the Inquisition. Of this number, it is known that 57 were sentenced to death and executed, and another 64 were burned in effigy (this sentence was applied to those who had fled or died in prison; in the latter case, the remains were burned in a coffin at the same time as the effigy).[53] Others were subjected to lesser punishments or penance, but the fate of many of those who were tried by the Inquisition is unknown.[54]

The Roman Inquisition, during the second half of the 16th century, was responsible for prosecuting individuals accused of a wide array of crimes relating to religious doctrine or alternate religious doctrine or alternate religious beliefs. Out of 51,000 — 75,000 cases judged by the Inquisition in Italy after 1542, around 1,250 resulted in a death sentence.[55]

The legal basis for some inquisitorial activity came from Pope Innocent IV's papal bull Ad extirpanda of 1252, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.[63] By 1256, inquisitors were given absolution if they used instruments of torture.
Christianity and violence - Wikipedia

Does this sound like Christ like behavior or thinking?

Too much for tonight.
I'll only say that the crusades were necessary.
Eve if mistakes were made, as they always are in war.
The Inquisition was demonic and it could never be justified.
Protestants burned people alive too.
Tomorrow.

 

[epostle1]

“On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)

That was written by Constantine as a civil law, not a religious law. Sunday as the first day of the week was well established by the Apostles 300 years previous, as shown in scripture.

The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).
According to this church if I observe Saturday I am cut off.... how Christian does that sound to you?

It doesn't say that. You get cut off for Judaizing. Why you make a fuss over how things were handled in the 4th century is anybody's guess. You think the world view of all Christians in 364 AD is exactly the same as the world view of white Anglo-saxon American Sabbitarian Protestants in the 21st century. pleeeze. Post a link to your source that gives context and not just misleading snippets.

The Council of Laodicea
Canon 16
The Gospels are to be read on the Sabbath [i.e. Saturday], with the other Scriptures.

Before the arrangement of the Ecclesiastical Psalmody was settled, neither the Gospel nor the other Scriptureswere accustomed to be read on the Sabbath. But out of regard to the canons which forbade fasting or kneelingon the Sabbath, there were no services, so that there might be as much feasting as possible. This the fathers prohibit, and decree that on the Sabbath the whole ecclesiastical office shall be said.

Neander (Kirchengesch., 2d ed., vol. iij., p. 565 et seq.) suggests in addition to the interpretation just given another, viz.: that it was the custom in many parts of the ancient Church to keep every Saturday as a feast in commemoration of the Creation. Neander also suggests that possibly some Judaizers read on the Sabbath only the Old Testament; he, however, himself remarks that in this case εὐαγγέλια and ἑτέρων γραφῶν would require the article.

Van Espen.

Among the Greeks the Sabbath was kept exactly as the Lord's day except so far as the cessation of work was concerned, wherefore the Council wishes that, as on Sundays, after the other lessons there should follow the Gospel.

For it is evident that by the intention of the Church the whole Divine Office was designed for the edification and instruction of the people, and especially was this the case on feast days, when the people were apt to be present in large numbers.

Here we may note the origin of our present [Western] discipline, by which on Sundays and feast days the Gospel is wont to be read with the other Scriptures in the canonical hours, while such is not the case on ferial days, or in the order for ferias and simples.
Synod of Laodicea (4th Century)

​

I have agreement with you that the churches who split off from Catholicism are in error but, my basis on this understanding is that when they split off they still carried along some of the error that had been already inherent with the original church and they just continued to go further into error.
The Jewish nation showed us that no church of God is immune to the influx of error when the will of man can be used to alter its intent and the CC has had a long time for alteration to infuse itself within it.

I have this perspective not because I am out to get anyone but rather as I review history and see how the fruits have manifested from the interactions between church and people I do not see the God I love in them.

It depends on where you look. You won't see the love of God in our worst examples. Comparing the best evangelicals with the worst Catholics is hardly fair. We have a long list of great heroes of the faith.

 

[epostle1]

Tradition
2. Theology - a doctrine believed to have divine authority though not in the scriptures, in particular.

Mark 7:9-13 9And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition...
....13Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

"none effect through your tradition," get it? your tradition, the ones they made up. ALL tradition as being bad is a false man made tradition. They are not all bad.

Timothy was never an apostle. Paul cannot pass on the such a position since apostles are chosen by God.
Timothy was a believer who was charged with doing what any believer could do.... pass on the teachings of the apostles
2 Tim 1:11(Paul) Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.
2 Tim 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word
4:5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist,

I never said Timothy was an Apostle. He was a bishop as defined by his function. Preach the word , do the work of an evangelist, and others.

 

[KBCid]

The Protestant Inquisition was worse. You don't want to me to disprove the unbiblical, unworkable, illogical, unhisorical man made tradition of sola scriptura so you throw up this rant, as if these things happened yesterday.

Did I say it was? the sect that you backed killed human beings through out its history from the 300's on
PERIOD. This is not Christ PERIOD.

 

[KBCid]

I can participate on Saturday late afternoon Mass and fulfill my Sunday obligation. You make a lot of noise over nothing.

You can do whatever your heart desires. I will do what God desires.

 

[KBCid]

Too much for tonight.
I'll only say that the crusades were necessary.
Even if mistakes were made, as they always are in war.
The Inquisition was demonic and it could never be justified.
Protestants burned people alive too.
Tomorrow.

I do not back any of the sects that did not or do not follow Christ, catholic or protestant... all fall way short of the commission Christ asks of all his followers.
Were the crusades needed? If we trust in God is he not greater than all the armies of the earth?

 

[KBCid]

"none effect through your tradition," get it? your tradition, the ones they made up. ALL tradition as being bad is a false man made tradition. They are not all bad.
I never said Timothy was an Apostle. He was a bishop as defined by his function. Preach the word , do the work of an evangelist, and others.

As I showed, the Jews by their traditions which were added to the pure word of God effectively nullified Gods intent just as is being done today. Different day same actions. Man just can't be content with God's word as it was given he has to add his own 2 cents in there because he thinks it doesn't say enough on its own.

Timothy therefore did not have an office passed on to him. He was appointed to be an evangelist thus, no transfer of apostolic authority. He was as much a man of God as any other fervent believer can be. It doesn't require an appointment of authority to be a man or woman of God.

 

[KBCid]

That was written by Constantine as a civil law, not a religious law. Sunday as the first day of the week was well established by the Apostles 300 years previous, as shown in scripture.

riiiiight. and yet no reference hmmmm.

It doesn't say that. You get cut off for Judaizing. Post a link to your source that gives context and not just misleading snippets.

Let's look at it again then;


The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).

You assert that the reference I gave doesn't say "Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day" and if "however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ”
The link to the book you want is in my library would you like the address? orrr you could go out and buy a copy for yourself like I did. A History of the Councils of the Church, Vol. 2: From the Original Documents (Classic Reprint)

You won't see the love of God in our worst examples. Comparing the best evangelicals with the worst Catholics is hardly fair. We have a long list of great heroes of the faith.

I don't see God as your cults continuous foundation and that is without comparison to anyone other than Christ. If you want to promote your cult you indeed have chosen the wrong person to evangelize to. I have studied history to an extent that prevents me from making your error. No apostolic succession is possible when the heads of a cult have no quandary about killing others.
THOU SHALT NOT KILL. its plain its simple it's the true Christian way.

Do I sound heretical? Do you feel that a little fire might change my mind?

 

[GodsGrace]

I do not back any of the sects that did not or do not follow Christ, catholic or protestant... all fall way short of the commission Christ asks of all his followers.
Were the crusades needed? If we trust in God is he not greater than all the armies of the earth?

They lost.
Had this conversation before.
God is not coming down here to fight our battles.
He didn't in the ot either.
Islam had to be stopped.
As it does today...

 

[epostle1]

The human beings that were the inspired writers of each of the scriptures were the ones to poof them into existence. What man does with them after they come into existence is where contention lies.
The Jews who God committed his oracles to in order to keep them pure and without blemish considered it ok to add their own ideas and traditions to be kept along with that pure word and as Christ said by your traditions (added to the original pure inspired word) you have made the word of God of no effect and have added so much crap to it that it is now a huge burden to those seeking to do what is right.
The church you adhere to is no different, what began as a pure inspired set of scriptures inspired by the Holy Spirit was taken by men with no inspiration and added to and has been adjusted to make it of no effect for those who seek the pureness of Christ.

You make empty assertions with no substance. The Bible flowed from the Catholic Church, a church didn't pop out of a book. You have no evidence of anything being added to Scripture.

Acts 20:28Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Do you know who the Gnostics were that Luke is referring to? And if you are suggesting that future bishops are speaking perverse things, do you have their names? I do.

 

[epostle1]

Holy War
Further information: Holy war § Christianity, and Crusades
In 1095, at the Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II declared that some wars could be deemed as not only a bellum iustum ("just war"), but could, in certain cases, rise to the level of a bellum sacrum (holy war).[36] ...
Thomas Murphy examined the Christian concept of Holy War, asking "how a culture formally dedicated to fulfilling the injunction to 'love thy neighbor as thyself' could move to a point where it sanctioned the use of violence against the alien both outside and inside society".
The religious sanctioning of the concept of "holy war" was a turning point in Christian attitudes towards violence; "Pope Gregory VII made the Holy War possible by drastically altering the attitude of the church towards war... Hitherto a knight could obtain remission of sins only by giving up arms, but Urban invited him to gain forgiveness 'in and through the exercise of his martial skills'." A holy war was defined by the Roman Catholic Church as "war that is not only just, but justifying; that is, a war that confers positive spiritual merit on those who fight in it".

The Inquisition is a group of institutions within the judicial system of the Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy[46] The Spanish Inquisition is often cited in popular literature and history as an example of Catholic intolerance and repression. The total number of people who were processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 of them were put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the actual death toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively.[citation needed] It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 people were executed.[47] About 50 people were executed by the Mexican Inquisition.[48] Included in that total are 29 people who were executed as "Judaizers" between 1571 and 1700 out of 324 people who were prosecuted for practicing the Jewish religion.[49]

In the Portuguese Inquisition the major targets were those who had converted from Judaism to Catholicism, the Conversos, also known as New Christians or Marranos, were suspected of secretly practising Judaism. Many of these were originally Spanish Jews, who had left Spain for Portugal. The number of victims is estimated to be around 40,000.[50][51] One particular focus of the Spanish and Portuguese inquisitions was the issue of Jewish anusim and Muslim converts to Catholicism, partly because these minority groups were more numerous in Spain and Portugal than they were in many other parts of Europe, and partly because they were often considered suspect due to the assumption that they had secretly reverted to their previous religions. The Goa Inquisition was the office of the Portuguese Inquisition acting in Portuguese India, and in the rest of the Portuguese Empire in Asia. It was established in 1560, briefly suppressed from 1774–1778, and finally abolished in 1812.[52] Based on the records that survive, H. P. Salomon and Rabbi Isaac S.D. Sassoon state that between the Inquisition's beginning in 1561 and its temporary abolition in 1774, some 16,202 persons were brought to trial by the Inquisition. Of this number, it is known that 57 were sentenced to death and executed, and another 64 were burned in effigy (this sentence was applied to those who had fled or died in prison; in the latter case, the remains were burned in a coffin at the same time as the effigy).[53] Others were subjected to lesser punishments or penance, but the fate of many of those who were tried by the Inquisition is unknown.[54]

The Roman Inquisition, during the second half of the 16th century, was responsible for prosecuting individuals accused of a wide array of crimes relating to religious doctrine or alternate religious doctrine or alternate religious beliefs. Out of 51,000 — 75,000 cases judged by the Inquisition in Italy after 1542, around 1,250 resulted in a death sentence.[55]

The legal basis for some inquisitorial activity came from Pope Innocent IV's papal bull Ad extirpanda of 1252, which explicitly authorized (and defined the appropriate circumstances for) the use of torture by the Inquisition for eliciting confessions from heretics.[63] By 1256, inquisitors were given absolution if they used instruments of torture.
Christianity and violence - Wikipedia

Does this sound like Christ like behavior or thinking?

None of this has anything to do with the Just War Doctrine. Like I said, the Protestant Inquisition was worse.

 

[epostle1]

riiiiight. and yet no reference hmmmm.
Let's look at it again then;
The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).

You assert that the reference I gave doesn't say "Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day" and if "however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ”
The link to the book you want is in my library would you like the address? orrr you could go out and buy a copy for yourself like I did. A History of the Councils of the Church, Vol. 2: From the Original Documents (Classic Reprint)
I don't see God as your cults continuous foundation and that is without comparison to anyone other than Christ. If you want to promote your cult you indeed have chosen the wrong person to evangelize to. I have studied history to an extent that prevents me from making your error. No apostolic succession is possible when the heads of a cult have no quandary about killing others.
THOU SHALT NOT KILL. its plain its simple it's the true Christian way.
Do I sound heretical? Do you feel that a little fire might change my mind?

More mindless ranting. The Church has the right and the authority to determine the primary day of worship , which is already in scripture. It's only been the last 100-150 years that bizarre sabbitarian cults have sprung up. They have no history.
And I asked for a link to your source on Laodicea, not a book you scour looking for weapons.
Massive killing on the part of the Church has never been documented with any scholarly rigor, (because its been so sadly exaggerated) it's hate propaganda by Johnny-come-lately cults trying to justify their late arrival.
I see you are unwilling to get off your anti-Catholic bandwagon and engage in any meaningful discussion.
I don't waste my time arguing with angry anti-Catholics.

 

[epostle1]

They lost.
Had this conversation before.
God is not coming down here to fight our battles.
He didn't in the ot either.
Islam had to be stopped.
As it does today...

Thank you. The Crusades were defensive wars, Muslims had occupied the Holy Land. What we have here is self-proclaimed historians.

 

[epostle1]

Catholics agree with Protestants that Scripture is a "standard of truth" — even the preeminent one — but not in a sense that rules out the binding authority of authentic apostolic Tradition and the Church. The Bible doesn't teach that. Catholics agree that Scripture is materially sufficient. In other words, on this view, every true doctrine can be found in the Bible, if only implicitly and indirectly by deduction. But no biblical passage teaches that Scripture is the formal authority or rule of faith in isolation from the Church and Tradition. Sola scriptura can't even be deduced from implicit passages.

Ephesians 4 Refutes the Protestant "Proof Text"

"All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).
This passage doesn't teach formal sufficiency, which excludes a binding, authoritative role for Tradition and the Church. Protestants extrapolate onto the text what isn't there. If we look at the overall context of this passage, we can see that Paul makes reference to oral Tradition three times (cf. 2 Tim. 1:13-14, 2:2, 3:14). And to use an analogy, let's examine a similar passage:

"And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ" (Eph. 4:11-15).

If 2 Timothy 3 proves the sole sufficiency of Scripture, then, by analogy, Ephesians 4 would likewise prove the sufficiency of pastors and teachers for the attainment of Christian perfection. In Ephesians 4, the Christian believer is equipped, built up, brought into unity and mature manhood, and even preserved from doctrinal confusion by means of the teaching function of the Church. This is a far stronger statement of the perfecting of the saints than 2 Timothy 3, yet it does not even mention Scripture.

So if all non-scriptural elements are excluded in 2 Timothy, then, by analogy, Scripture would logically have to be excluded in Ephesians. It is far more reasonable to recognize that the absence of one or more elements in one passage does not mean that they are nonexistent. The Church and Scripture are both equally necessary and important for teaching.

 

[Richard_oti]

GG I gave a reference that the CC "believes" they have the authority to change the teachings of Christ.
I am firm in my understanding that no such authority exists.

<snip>

Dan 7:25 And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and half a time.

 

[Richard_oti]

Changing the Sabbath to Sunday:
We Christians all THINK Jesus was resurrected on Sunday.
HE is our new Sabbath, so it seems like an honorable thing to change the day we're to celebrate and honor God.

Which is not the same as upholding the "10", for that is to uphold "9", and do according to "man" with regard to one. So while it "seems" honorable, is it really honorable to attempt to change the set times and laws that YHVH has established?

How did that work out for Jeroboam?

1Ki 12:32 And Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month, on the fifteenth day of the month, like unto the feast that is in Judah, and he went up unto the altar; so did he in Beth-el, sacrificing unto the calves that he had made: and he placed in Beth-el the priests of the high places that he had made. 33 And he went up unto the altar which he had made in Beth-el on the fifteenth day in the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised of his own heart: and he ordained a feast for the children of Israel, and went up unto the altar, to burn incense.