What is the one true Church?

[amigo de christo]

View attachment 32016

Looks like a few faces do when they read what i type . always angry at the non conforming truth
that Faith in Christ is what saves and that all other religions are false and lead only to graves .

 

[amigo de christo]

Faith in JESUS CHRIST saves
faith in any other religoin GRAVES .

 

[Brakelite]

Sorry you feel that way.
My intent is to be accurate.
How many red letters do you see from me?
I have had some say that I need to use more smiley faces because I come a crossed to serious.
I usually spend my time remaining calm while dogging insults.
If you think I am being rude or to curt with you, call me on it and I will explain myself.

I wasn't referring that letter to you, it was too BoL, sorry for the confusion

 

[Brakelite]

Ya a lot times people refer to the varies churches as denominations....what cha going to call them?......a special designation.
As far as Christ founding the Catholic Church....we would not be in this thread if he founded a Church by name....giving His stamp of approval... wouldn't that make things nice. As it is even though the Coptic Church is the oldest Christian church, that does not give it prominence over other churches or denominations or whatever you want to call them.

Christianity was never about a church and God.....it about a person....everyone of us and God with nothing between us and God.

I would dispute the Coptic church or the Catholic Church as being first. The Jerusalem church was first, then the Asian churches, and after 70ad, the Christians as they them became known, congregated on large numbers in Pella, Antioch, etc. Papal Rome never had any political or religious jurisdiction or authority over any of those cities or churches. Rome would have loved to have influence over Jerusalem, but not even the crusades gave them that. No, it was the emperor Justinian who gave them "his seat, great power and authority", and that authority rm wasn't established by God, but by secular armies proclaiming themselves Catholic for the sake of power. Clovis being the first barbarian king to do so in the 6yh century...I think. Coersion and force was always the means by which the Catholic gospel was promulgated.

 

[Grailhunter]

I would dispute the Coptic church or the Catholic Church as being first. The Jerusalem church was first, then the Asian churches, and after 70ad, the Christians as they them became known, congregated on large numbers in Pella, Antioch, etc.

Some of this is apples and oranges.
The Church is never named in the Bible. Which is one of the reason that people have room to insert arbitrary names.
Christ teaching produced The Way and the term Christian. We could definitely call these the first church or congregations. But even in the biblical era....Gospels and Acts....could we call them one church or one belief? No we cannot. Because there were two district groups Jewish-Christians and Gentile Christians, and their beliefs were different....which is a complicated topic, and they practiced Christianity different.
The Coptic Church formed within the biblical time period.
The Catholic Church a few centuries later.

Then you have theologians and historians that try to track the activities of the various churches in various regions. And then Pella has it own history.

Now you mentioned Asian Churches....as in early....would you like to expand upon that?

 

[Grailhunter]

I wasn't referring that letter to you, it was too BoL, sorry for the confusion

No harm no foul....

 

[BreadOfLife]

....and Satan presents himself as an angel of light.
....but betrays himself by pointing to his 'good works' 'look at me, look at me, look at me .....I'm the greatest, I have the numbers, nobody else compares'.......and without shame says, glorify me!

......when Jesus says, 'don't let your left hand know what your right hand does'

WRONG.

The Church doesn’t pat itself on the back for its incredible charitable and godly works.
I was simply pointing to this fact because of the idiotic charge that we “wasted” money on beautiful buildings.

Face it – your attack falls flat on its face because the Church us truly doing the Lord’s work . . .

 

[robert derrick]

I agree. But let's define "saints"

Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.

For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.

Saint: not ungodly, not a sinner.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No , not true . every different langauge was given on the day GOD sent confusion amongst the people .
versions of languages do change .
RUINC . English has been spoken for a long , long time . In a form we might not understand today .

You obviously haven’t been reading the conversation – so you are confused.

This is a PRIME example of the way you approach theological conversations as well – with confusion and cluelessness . . .

As far as the RCC is concerned , i would run and not look back .

Ignorant people always run from that which they cannot grasp . . .

 

[Marymog]

Their just sites and buildings . THE CHURCH is far more than that my friend .
What they should have done was simply preached the true gospel to them .
And if they were killed for doing so , then amen . The true apostels , lots of them were killed for preaching CHRIST .
They would never have taken up arms like the RCC did .

You crack me up.....You are ignorant of your own Christian history and Scripture.

It was not the Catholic Church that took up arms. It was knights, counts and commoners! Sooo you got that wrong.....

You would have been imprisoned by 'simply preaching the true gospel to them'. Then the true Christian men would have come to save you. Would you then preach to the Christian men that saved you about how they violated Scripture?????????

If every Christian at the time would have followed your un-Scriptural advise.....Christianity would be no more since they would all be dead.

 

[Jim B]

Faith in JESUS CHRIST saves
faith in any other religoin GRAVES .

True, but very poor "poetry".

 

[amigo de christo]

True, but very poor "poetry".

Just love it jim .

 

[amigo de christo]

You crack me up.....You are ignorant of your own Christian history and Scripture.

It was not the Catholic Church that took up arms. It was knights, counts and commoners! Sooo you got that wrong.....

You would have been imprisoned by 'simply preaching the true gospel to them'. Then the true Christian men would have come to save you. Would you then preach to the Christian men that saved you about how they violated Scripture?????????

If every Christian at the time would have followed your un-Scriptural advise.....Christianity would be no more since they would all be dead.

The popes , some of them sure seemed to SUPPORT it and call for it . Sure they didnt pick up arms .
Sure the jewish leaders didnt put JESUS to death . But they both used others to get the jobs done .
THEY as GUILTY as the one doing the killing . And so what if one is imprisoned for preaching the gospel .
THAT SURE DIDNT SEEM To stop peter , paul , john or others . The RCC got you duped real bad my friend .
And to anyone who would pick up arms in the name of Christ to come to my rescue
my message is DONT . YOU PRAY LIKE THE EARLY CHURCH DID .
they didnt come in arms blazing and rescue peter from prison . THEY PRAYED .
THE RCC got you duped real bad . Besides even that . IF MY TIME IS UP ITS UP . GOD IS IN CONTROL there MARYMOG
AND if i die in prison , THEN MY TIME WAS UP and i shall be with HIM . GOD IS IN CONTROL . not men , not us . GOD .
TIME we return to the true faith and stop making excuses for why our leaders did and do as they do .
You are loved my friend . Just trying to help you .

 

[amigo de christo]

You obviously haven’t been reading the conversation – so you are confused.

This is a PRIME example of the way you approach theological conversations as well – with confusion and cluelessness . . .

Ignorant people always run from that which they cannot grasp . . .

cant argue with your last line . ignorant people sure do run from what they cannot grasp .
My advice is , take a peek in the mirror my friend .

 

[Grailhunter]

Part of understanding history is understanding the time period.
The biblical era was crazy violent and it did not get much better after that. Cities smelled like sewers and death. No real pain killers so the moans of cries of people sick and dying could usually be heard....people died along side the roads. Violent bands of people roamed the lands and then you had the Goths.

There is nothing of any significance that could survive without being able to defend itself. The Romans took the approach of being overtly cruel and visibly gross to keep people in check. When you entered a city you would likely walk by naked people tied or nailed to crosses just as a warning.

This was the environment that the Catholic Church was born in and luckily it had the Roman Empire by its side to keep its enemies at bay. It is true that the Catholic clergy generally did not take up arms, but the Empires and Kingdoms were their military arms to do their bidding. Eventually you would have Christian Knights and some of them were monks.

The Catholic Church changed the Roman Empire, Christian beliefs made the Empire more civilized and kinder. Byzantium was built and it was a city of Christian learning. The Roman Empire changed but it still existed in a very primitive and violent era and the enemies of Rome saw this kinder Christian Rome as a weakness and the Roman Empire found itself under attack from all sides.

Eventually the Church and Rome had to rethink their strategy ergo the Holy Roman Empire and Emperor Charlemagne. Charlemagne was a French warrior who was uneducated but believed in education, ergo the Carolingian Renaissance. As a warrior he revised some the old Roman tactics....completely devastating his enemies was his approach. He turned things around for the Church and the Empire.

My point here is that when your looking back at history and judging what people are doing, you have to consider what the time period is doing? LOL It does not justify all but it does give you an idea of the flavor of the day.

 

[amigo de christo]

Part of understanding history is understanding the time period.
The biblical era was crazy violent and it did not get much better after that. Cities smelled like sewers and death. No real pain killers so the moans of cries of people sick and dying could usually be heard....people died along side the roads. Violent bands of people roamed the lands and then you had the Goths.

There is nothing of any significance that could survive without being able to defend itself. The Romans took the approach of being overtly cruel and visibly gross to keep people in check. When you entered a city you would likely walk by naked people tied or nailed to crosses just as a warning.

This was the environment that the Catholic Church was born in and luckily it had the Roman Empire by its side to keep its enemies at bay. It is true that the Catholic clergy generally did not take up arms, but the Empires and Kingdoms were their military arms to do their bidding. Eventually you would have Christian Knights and some of them were monks.

The Catholic Church changed the Roman Empire, Christian beliefs made the Empire more civilized and kinder. Byzantium was built and it was a city of Christian learning. The Roman Empire changed but it still existed in a very primitive and violent era and the enemies of Rome saw this kinder Christian Rome as a weakness and the Roman Empire found itself under attack from all sides.

Eventually the Church and Rome had to rethink their strategy ergo the Holy Roman Empire and Emperor Charlemagne. Charlemagne was a French warrior who was uneducated but believed in education, ergo the Carolingian Renaissance. As a warrior he revised some the old Roman tactics....completely devastating his enemies was his approach. He turned things around for the Church and the Empire.

My point here is that when your looking back at history and judging what people are doing, you have to consider what the time period is doing? LOL It does not justify all but it does give you an idea of the flavor of the day.

Rather odd , stephen never defended himself . Nope . no matter how harsh things got , they followed CHRIST
no matter the cost . And its about to get far worse real fast . dont pick up guns or weapons to defend thyself .
PICK up and strap on the ARMOUR OF GOD . HE is in control . Many will die , many will suffer , but CHRIST shall be with the lambs
through it all . AND IF WE DIE , well only the body dies , IN CHRIST WE WILL LIVE FOREVER .
PREACH JESUS and let us learn HIM WELL .

 

[BreadOfLife]

cant argue with your last line . ignorant people sure do run from what they cannot grasp .
My advice is , take a peek in the mirror my friend .

That's all I need - a BLIND guide . . .

 

[amigo de christo]

I would dispute the Coptic church or the Catholic Church as being first. The Jerusalem church was first, then the Asian churches, and after 70ad, the Christians as they them became known, congregated on large numbers in Pella, Antioch, etc. Papal Rome never had any political or religious jurisdiction or authority over any of those cities or churches. Rome would have loved to have influence over Jerusalem, but not even the crusades gave them that. No, it was the emperor Justinian who gave them "his seat, great power and authority", and that authority rm wasn't established by God, but by secular armies proclaiming themselves Catholic for the sake of power. Clovis being the first barbarian king to do so in the 6yh century...I think. Coersion and force was always the means by which the Catholic gospel was promulgated.

I notice something . The very things the non following GOD jewish leaders did
ROME FOLLOWED THAT PATTERN . Its like it never died but was reborn under a new name .
Rome became the very jerusalem which had fallen . And now she calls for HEALING THE WOUND . rather odd too .
Healing the WOUND is the cry of francis and protestant leaders like copeland and scores of others .
ALL about bringing us back under ROME who is under OLD JERSUALEM . The whore didnt die my friend
she has been busy and at work . SOON she will sit atop all the worlds religions , SOON
she will reign from JERSUALEM . mark those words well . The unficiation of all religions cannot be stopped .
TIS A STRONG DELUSION to unite the world as ONE under a LIE , under the dragon , under its beast
under the whore . Yeah , ponder on that for a while .

 

[amigo de christo]

That's all I need - a BLIND guide . . .

That is what i keep trying to tell you . You are following a blind guide . THE RCC is blind my friend . Blind .
You will be prayed for as well . My desire is only good for you . Leave her and learn CHRIST well .

 

[Jim B]

You crack me up.....You are ignorant of your own Christian history and Scripture.

It was not the Catholic Church that took up arms. It was knights, counts and commoners! Sooo you got that wrong.....

You would have been imprisoned by 'simply preaching the true gospel to them'. Then the true Christian men would have come to save you. Would you then preach to the Christian men that saved you about how they violated Scripture?????????

If every Christian at the time would have followed your un-Scriptural advise.....Christianity would be no more since they would all be dead.

The Crusades were a series of religious wars initiated, supported, and sometimes directed by the Latin Church in the medieval period.

Crusades, military expeditions, beginning in the late 11th century, that were organized by western European Christians in response to centuries of Muslim wars of expansion. Their objectives were to check the spread of Islam, to retake control of the Holy Land in the eastern Mediterranean, to conquer pagan areas, and to recapture formerly Christian territories; they were seen by many of their participants as a means of redemption and expiation for sins. Between 1095, when the First Crusade was launched, and 1291, when the Latin Christians were finally expelled from their kingdom in Syria, there were numerous expeditions to the Holy Land, to Spain, and even to the Baltic; the Crusades continued for several centuries after 1291. Crusading declined rapidly during the 16th century with the advent of the Protestant Reformation and the decline of papal authority. (Brittanica.com)

The Crusades were a series of military campaigns organised by popes and Christian western powers to take Jerusalem and the Holy Land back from Muslim control and then defend those gains. There were eight major official crusades between 1095 and 1270, as well as many more unofficial ones.

Although there were many crusades, none would be as successful as the first, and by 1291 the Crusader-created states in the Middle East were absorbed into the Mamluk Sultanate. The idea of crusading was applied more successfully (for Christians) to other regions, notably in the Baltic against European pagans and in the Iberian Peninsula against the Muslim Moors.

Involving emperors, kings, and Europe's nobility, as well as thousands of knights and more humble warriors, the Crusades would have tremendous consequences for all involved. The effects, besides the obvious death, ruined lives, destruction and wasted resources, ranged from the collapse of the Byzantine Empire to a souring of relations and intolerance between religions and peoples in the East and West which still blights governments and societies today. (world history.org)

YOU are ignorant of your own Christian history and Scripture.