"When did the RCC begin?"

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Roman Catholic Church claims that the early Christians were all Roman Catholics, and that (aside from the Orthodox Church) all Christians were Roman Catholics until the Protestant Reformation. It claims that the Apostle Peter was the first Pope, ruling from Rome. It also claims that it gave us the Bible.

But do these claims stand up to the test of history? Or are they false credentials?

There is historical evidence that the Roman Catholic Church began with Emperor Constantine. Many Protestants believe that throughout Church history, there have been many true Christians who were not Catholics, and these Christians were often killed by the Catholic Church. They also believe that Peter was just one of the apostles, and that the Catholic Church only copied and preserved the Bible, which God had already given to us.

EMPEROR CONSTANTINE
On October 28, 312 A.D., the Roman Emperor Constantine met with Bishop Miltiades. (Catholics would later refer to him as Pope Miltiades. But at the time he was known as the Bishop of Rome.) Miltiades was assisted by Silvester, a Roman who spoke educated Latin, and acted as interpreter.
The previous day, Constantine had seen a sign in the heavens: a cross in front of the sun. He heard a voice say, "In this sign you will conquer." He painted crosses on the shields of his soldiers. He won an important battle, and was convinced that it was because of the power of the sign that he had seen. He asked for two of the nails that were used to crucify Jesus. One nail was made into a bit for
his horse. Another nail was made a part of his crown, signifying that Constantine ruled the Roman Empire in the name of Jesus. He allowed Miltiades to keep the third nail. Note 1

The fact that Constantine saw the cross and the sun together may explain why he worshiped the Roman sun god while at the same time professing to be a Christian. After his "conversion," Constantine built a triumphal arch featuring the Roman sun god (the "unconquered sun"). His coins featured the sun. Constantine made a statue of the sun god, with his own face on it, for his new city of Constantinople. He made Sunday (the day of the sun god) into a day of rest when work was forbidden. Note 2

Constantine declared that a mosaic of the Roman sun god (riding in a chariot) was a representation of Jesus. During Constantine's reign, many Christians incorporated worship of the Roman sun god into their religion. They prayed kneeling towards the east (where the sun rises). They said that Jesus Christ drives his chariot across the sky (like the Roman sun god). They had their worship services on Sunday, which honored the Roman sun god. (Days of the week were named to honor pagan gods. For example, Saturday is "Saturn's day," named for the Roman god Saturn.) They celebrated the birth of Jesus on December 25, the day when sun worshipers celebrated the birthday of the sun following the winter solstice. Note 3

Historians disagree as to whether or not Constantine actually became a Christian. His character certainly did not reflect the teachings of Jesus Christ. Constantine was vain, violent, and superstitious. His combination of worshiping the Christian God and the old Roman sun god may have been an attempt to cover all the bases. (A similar spirit can be seen in Americans who financially support both opposing candidates during an election. No matter who wins, they expect to have the favor of the person in power.) Constantine had little if any respect for human life. He was known for wholesale slaughter during his military campaigns. He forced prisoners of war to fight for their lives against wild beasts. He had several family members (including his second wife) executed for doubtful reasons. Constantine waited until he was dying before he asked to be baptized. Historians disagree as to whether or not he actually was baptized. Note 4

Constantine wanted to have a state Church, with Christian clergy acting as civil servants. He called himself a Bishop. He said that he was the interpreter of the Word of God, and the voice which declares what is true and godly. According to historian Paul Johnson, Constantine saw himself as being an important agent of salvation, on a par with the apostles. Bishop Eusebius (Constantine's eulogist) relates that Constantine built the Church of the Apostles with the intention of having his body be kept there along with the bodies of the apostles. Constantine's coffin was to be in the center (the place of honor), with six apostles on each side of him. He expected that devotions honoring the apostles would be performed in the church, and he expected to share the title and honor of the apostles. Note 5

Constantine told Bishop Miltiades that he wanted to build two Christian basilicas, one dedicated to the Apostle Peter and one dedicated to the Apostle Paul. He offered a large, magnificent palace for the use of Miltiades and his successors. Miltiades refused. He could not accept the idea of having Christianity be promoted by the Roman Empire. Note 6

Constantine rode off to war. By the time that he returned in 314 A.D., Miltiades had died. Bishop Silvester was Miltiades' successor. Silvester was eager to have the Church be spread using Roman roads, Roman wealth, Roman law, Roman power, and Roman military might. Constantine officially approved of Silvester as the successor of Miltiades. Then he had a coronation ceremony for Silvester and crowned him like a worldly prince. No bishop had ever been crowned before. Note 7 Constantine's actions give the impression that he believed that he had authority over the Church.

Before Constantine's "conversion," Christians were persecuted. Now, instead of facing persecution, Bishop Silvester lived in the lap of luxury. He had a beautiful palace, with the finest furniture and art. He wore silk brocade robes. He had servants to wait on him. Near his palace was a basilica which was to serve as his cathedral. This luxurious building had seven altars made of gold, a canopy of solid silver above the main altar, and 50 chandeliers. The imperial mail system and transportation system were placed at Silvester's disposal. It was now possible to have worldwide church councils. Note 8
Read the Book of Acts and the Epistles and compare the Church shown there to the Church of Bishop Silvester. Here is how the Apostle Paul described the kinds of things that he had to endure, as a leader in the early Church.

"Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep; In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness." (2 Corinthians 11:24-27)

After Constantine's "conversion," the Church was radically changed. Suddenly, being Christian resulted in power, prestige, and promotion (whereas previously it had resulted in persecution). Suddenly, by the Emperor's decree, Christianity became "politically correct". So ambitious people joined the Church for worldly reasons. The Bishop of Rome was supported by the military might, political power, and wealth of the Roman Emperor. Worldwide church councils were convened. This was the birth of the Roman Catholic Church. It was created in the year 314 A.D. by Emperor Constantine and Bishop Silvester. Note 9

Reference Notes:
1. Malachi Martin, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church" (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1981), pages 31-33. A major theme of this book is the radical change which occurred in the Church as a result of Constantine. Malachi Martin recently died. He was a Catholic priest, a theologian, and a Vatican insider. He was the personal confessor of Pope John XXIII.
2. Paul Johnson, "A History of Christianity" (New York: Touchstone, Simon & Schuster, 1995), pages 67-68. Paul Johnson is a Catholic and a prominent historian.
3. Malachi Martin, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church," page 33; and Paul Johnson, "A History of Christianity," page 67. Information about the days of the week being named for pagan gods and goddesses can be found in a good dictionary. Look up each day of the week, and "Saturn". I used "Webster's Dictionary," 1941 edition, which gives the origins of words.
4. Paul Johnson, "A History of Christianity," pages 68-69.
5. Paul Johnson, "A History of Christianity," page 69.
6. Malachi Martin, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church," pages 33-34.
7. Malachi Martin, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church," pages 34-35.
8. James G. McCarthy, "The Gospel According to Rome" (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 1995), pages 231-232. James McCarthy is a former Catholic
9. Mary Ann Collins
http://formercatholicsforchrist.com/maryancollins/index.htmlAnnCollins is a former Catholic nun
--------
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rollo Tamasi

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
What makes me angry about this sort of copy and paste (and it is just copy and paste) is that the scholarship is so shoddy. Indeed it doesn't even deserve the title scholarship of any kind.

It's copy and paste from an article under the authorship of "Mary Ann Collins (a former Catholic nun)"

Do you realise that no such person exists - except on an anti-catholic website?
See here: http://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/mary_ann_collins.php

Then there is Malachi Martin.
For an expose of him see: http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/truth-about-malachi-martin.htm

He is about as reliable as Dan Brown.

There are no quotations from actual documents of the time. Claims are made that have no evidence or are irrelevant. It’s more Dan Brown than history.

Here are some of the obvious bloopers:

“They had their worship services on Sunday, which honored the Roman sun god. (Days of the week were named to honor pagan gods. For example, Saturday is "Saturn's day," named for the Roman god Saturn.).”
The early Christians worshiped on Sunday, yes. But how is the name relevant? Christians didn’t name the days of the week. Jews worshipped on Saturday. Do you accuse them of worshipping Saturn?
Moreover it didn’t start with Constantine.
Paul told the Corinthians to make a collection on the first day of the week (1Cor 16;2)
Why? Because that is when they came together to worship (Acts 20:7)

In the second century Justin Martyr wrote a description of Sunday worship “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits….” (First Apology, 67)

Constantine wanted to have a state Church, with Christian clergy acting as civil servants.
Constantine didn’t make Christianity the state Church. That did not happen until 380 AD under Emperors Gratian (West) and Theodosius I (East).

They prayed kneeling towards the east (where the sun rises)
The reason for praying towards the east (ad orientum) is because that is where scripture says Christ will come from at the second coming. Jesus, speaking about the “end times” says
“For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man.” (Mt 24;27).
So at mass were are not only remembering the Last Supper, Death and Resurrection of Christ, but we are looking forward to His second coming in glory.
For example at Mass we say:
“We proclaim your Death, O Lord,
and profess your Resurrection
until you come again.”

The previous day, Constantine had seen a sign in the heavens: a cross in front of the sun.
According to Google Books, “Eusebius' Life of Constantine is the most important single record of Constantine,” Eusebius was the church historian who was a contemporary of Constantine. His account of the Constantine’s vision puts the cross above the sun. He gives details account of the making of the Standard of The Cross but no mention of the sun being on it not any mentions of this nail story.
http://legacy.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/vita-constantine.asp

Finally if you look at samples of Constantine’s coins, none of them show the sun.
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?vpar=187
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
When did the church start:
-
\Why is it important to know when the church for this age of grace started
-
If we think that the church for this age started with Peter on the day of Pentecost then we must consider that Peter was still a Jew, speaking to Jews, going to the Jewish Temple to worship and that he still wanted to keep the Law of Moses when he told God he did not want to eat anything unclean and that his going to the house of a Gentile would make him unclean.. --- (see supporting scriptures below)
-
In other words he considered himself to still be under the Jewish law. No where in his preaching on the day of Pentecost did he indicate that no one was under the Law of Moses. Therefore if the church started with Peter’s preaching on the day of Pentecost, then the church started under the Law of Moses, not grace, and Paul’s gospel was a heresy.
-
In addition, the scriptures state the gospel of grace that was given to Paul had been hidden in God and was now revealed to Paul. Therefore, the gospel of grace was not given to mankind until Paul preached it.
-
Therefore a person has to choose whether he is in a church started under the law of Moses or a church that started under grace the day Paul, preached the gospel of grace. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t mix law and grace without destroying them both and, in my opinion, that is just what most of the churches of today are doing.
-
According to the scriptures the world will be judged according to Paul’s gospel (not Peter‘s). That is why it is important to know when your church started.
-
-
Supporting scripture:
-
Acts 2:46
46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart,
NKJV
-
Acts 3:1
3 Now Peter and John went up together to the temple at the hour of prayer, the ninth hour.
NKJV
-
Acts 3:6-8
6 Then Peter said, "Silver and gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk."
7 And he took him by the right hand and lifted him up, and immediately his feet and ankle bones received strength.
8 So he, leaping up, stood and walked and entered the temple with them — walking, leaping, and praising God.
NKJV
-
Acts 5:25
25 So one came and told them, saying, "Look, the men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people!"
NKJV
-
Acts 5:41-42
41 So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.
42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.
NKJV
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
H. Richard said:
When did the church start:
-
\Why is it important to know when the church for this age of grace started
-
If we think that the church for this age started with Peter on the day of Pentecost then we must consider that Peter was still a Jew, speaking to Jews, going to the Jewish Temple to worship and that he still wanted to keep the Law of Moses when he told God he did not want to eat anything unclean and that his going to the house of a Gentile would make him unclean.. --- (see supporting scriptures below)
-
In other words he considered himself to still be under the Jewish law. No where in his preaching on the day of Pentecost did he indicate that no one was under the Law of Moses. Therefore if the church started with Peter’s preaching on the day of Pentecost, then the church started under the Law of Moses, not grace, and Paul’s gospel was a heresy.
-
In addition, the scriptures state the gospel of grace that was given to Paul had been hidden in God and was now revealed to Paul. Therefore, the gospel of grace was not given to mankind until Paul preached it.
-
Therefore a person has to choose whether he is in a church started under the law of Moses or a church that started under grace the day Paul, preached the gospel of grace. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t mix law and grace without destroying them both and, in my opinion, that is just what most of the churches of today are doing.
-
According to the scriptures the world will be judged according to Paul’s gospel (not Peter‘s). That is why it is important to know when your church started.
-
-
Supporting scripture:
-
Acts 2:46
46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart,
NKJV
-
Acts 3:1
3 Now Peter and John went up together to the temple at the hour of prayer, the ninth hour.
NKJV
-
Acts 3:6-8
6 Then Peter said, "Silver and gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk."
7 And he took him by the right hand and lifted him up, and immediately his feet and ankle bones received strength.
8 So he, leaping up, stood and walked and entered the temple with them — walking, leaping, and praising God.
NKJV
-
Acts 5:25
25 So one came and told them, saying, "Look, the men whom you put in prison are standing in the temple and teaching the people!"
NKJV
-
Acts 5:41-42
41 So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name.
42 And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.
NKJV
All totally irrelevant to the points I made.

You made a blatant copy & paste full of errors and lies and seem to be avoiding admitting your error.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mungo said:
All totally irrelevant to the points I made.

You made a blatant copy & paste full of errors and lies and seem to be avoiding admitting your error.
And your post is totally irrelevant to what I said in my post.

You never talk about the subject of my posts and replies all you do is talk about me.

I have made NO errors in what I posted and gave the scriptures to support what I posted. You say there are simple because you disagree with them.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
H. Richard said:
And your post is totally irrelevant to what I said in my post.

You never talk about the subject of my posts and replies all you do is talk about me.

I have made NO errors in what I posted and gave the scriptures to support what I posted. You say there are simple because you disagree with them.
You made various accusations in your OP.

I replied to them showing how you were wrong. So I did talk about the subjet of your post

The burden of proof of what you claimed lies with you but you made no attempt to defend your claims. Instead you diverted into an irrelevant point not related to the OP or to my response. It is you that did not reply to the subject of my post.

Now please can I have a response to my post #2 or just admit you made false claims.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mungo said:
You made various accusations in your OP.

I replied to them showing how you were wrong. So I did talk about the subjet of your post

The burden of proof of what you claimed lies with you but you made no attempt to defend your claims. Instead you diverted into an irrelevant point not related to the OP or to my response. It is you that did not reply to the subject of my post.

Now please can I have a response to my post #2 or just admit you made false claims.
How wonderful!!! If I don't reply then you say I am admitting I made false claims. That is your way of MAKING me reply to you.

No, I will not reply to your post #2. I stand behind what I wrote in the OP and see no need to defend it against your claims. They are just your opinions and your opinions are those that defend your religion.

I have no love for the RCC. The RCC has the blood of those it burned at the stake for having a different view of the scriptures on it's hands. In the dark ages the RCC intimidated kings into submission so as to get their money by saying they would be thrown out of the RCC. The RCC has the blood of Tyndale on it's hands just because he printed the Bible. They did this because they knew the scriptures did not support their brand of religion. They used the inquisition to kill anyone that did not conform to their religion.

What I see is that the attitude of the RCC is same as those religious people that had Jesus crucified for daring to say the religious were wrong. The religious also stoned Stephen for saying the Jews were wrong in crucifying Jesus because Jesus was their Messiah and King. I have no doubt in my mind that if Jesus came back in the same way he did then the RCC would have Him burned at the stake.

Everyone of the above facts are a matter of Historical records which you will say are wrong.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
H. Richard said:
How wonderful!!! If I don't reply then you say I am admitting I made false claims. That is your way of MAKING me reply to you.

No, I will not reply to your post #2. I stand behind what I wrote in the OP and see no need to defend it against your claims. They are just your opinions and your opinions are those that defend your religion.

I have no love for the RCC. The RCC has the blood of those it burned at the stake for having a different view of the scriptures on it's hands. In the dark ages the RCC intimidated kings into submission so as to get their money by saying they would be thrown out of the RCC. The RCC has the blood of Tyndale on it's hands just because he printed the Bible. They did this because they knew the scriptures did not support their brand of religion. They used the inquisition to kill anyone that did not conform to their religion.

What I see is that the attitude of the RCC is same as those religious people that had Jesus crucified for daring to say the religious were wrong. The religious also stoned Stephen for saying the Jews were wrong in crucifying Jesus because Jesus was their Messiah and King. I have no doubt in my mind that if Jesus came back in the same way he did then the RCC would have Him burned at the stake.

Everyone of the above facts are a matter of Historical records which you will say are wrong.

1. You didn't write the OP. You just did a copy and paste.

2. You provide no HISTORICAL proof of the claims.

And now you produce more lies backed up by no evidence. That appears to be a pattern with you.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mungo said:
1. You didn't write the OP. You just did a copy and paste.

2. You provide no HISTORICAL proof of the claims.

And now you produce more lies backed up by no evidence. That appears to be a pattern with you.
You must not have studied history in school. I did and my conclusions are based on those studies.
 

heretoeternity

New Member
Oct 11, 2014
1,237
39
0
85
Asia/Pacific
Revelation 17 of the Bible is very clear what God thinks of the Roman church...and 18 very clear on how it will be destroyed, because of it's spiritual fornication and evil it has spread throughout the world...as God says in Revelation "come out of her" unless of course you want to be destroyed along with her!
:
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
H. Richard said:
You must not have studied history in school. I did and my conclusions are based on those studies.
Which "studies" would that be? How about you post the name of the books.

Logical Problems with the Constantine Founder Myth:
  • If Constantine started the Catholic Church, then it would, therefore, seem to follow that Constantine himself was a Catholic Christian. This was not the case. Constantine (possibly) would not be baptized into the faith until he was on his deathbed on May 22, 337 A.D.
  • For Christianity to become the official religion of the Roman Empire, would require an Edict. The Edict of Milan, which was issued by Constantine and Licinius (as noted above) only put Christians on equal footing with all the other recognized religions in the Roman Empire; granting the same religious freedom that was already being extended to the pagans and Jews. It would not be until 392 A.D. when Emperor Theodosius removed government support from the old Roman pagan religions and established the Christian Faith (Catholicism) as the sole religion of the empire.
3. If by virtue of Constantine calling a general council of all the bishops of the Church to meet with him at Nicaea (a resort town in the hills of Asia Minor just south of Constantinople), a Church was created, it then, therefore, follows that:
(a) the Church that existed prior to the Council from which all the bishops were called merged themselves into the new church of Constantine;
(b.) we should see no continuity between the preexisting church and the new Church;
(c) we should see no continuity between the pre-Nicaea Church and modern day Catholic Church.

4. That Constantine assembled together all of the bishops of the Roman Empire proves that there were well-organized dioceses and churches prior the First Council of Nicaea who were in agreement with each other. Further research into this area will demonstrate the precise areas in which they agreed, such as the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, about many of the books which were thought to be inspired Scripture, and the Bishop of Rome being the successor of Peter and the head of the universal Church.[/size]

5. 218 years before the Council of Nicaea Saint Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, appointed by Saint Peter, wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans in which he used the word ‘Catholic’ to denote the Church established by Jesus Christ:
  • “Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people also be: as Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
6. 170 years before the Council of Nicaea Saint Justin Martyr wrote in First Apology (a letter to pagan emperor Antoninus Pius (138-161 A.D.) explaining what Christians did at Mass).

7. 136 years before the Council of Nicaea Saint Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, and a disciple of Saint Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John, proclaimed that all churches must be in unity with the Church of Rome, which was established by Peter and Paul.

8. Prior to the Council of Nicaea there had been many local councils where local bishops, priests, and deacons gathered to issue canons to the faithful; such as the Councils of Carthage, where Saint Cyprian presided at the Seventh Council in 256 A.D. where a canon was issued stating, [/size]“. . . heretics, who are called antichrists and adversaries of Christ, when they come to the Church, must be baptized with the one Baptism of the Church, so that friends may be made of adversaries, and Christians of antichrists.” Another example of the Council of Elvira, Spain in 300 A.D. where 19 bishops and 26 priests and deacons gathered together to issue 81 canons. Canon 16 stated, “Heretics, if they do not which to come over to the Catholic Church, are not to be given Catholic girls in marriage.” Therefore, how could Constantine have started the Catholic Church in 325 A.D. if it already existed in Africa and Spain in 256 and 300 A.D.???

The Romans were aficionados when it came to documenting the legal affairs and history of the Empire. If it had been the case that Constantine established his own state religion or established a new state Church, we would have been able to find it documented somewhere in history that such an event happened, but when we examine the history and legal documents from ancient Rome, we find no traces that the myth that Constantine founded the Catholic Church is true.[/size]

Moreover, if Constantine did found the Catholic Church at the First Council of Nicaea then we should be able to find at least some once reference to the Roman Emperor in the creed and canons of the Council, but in the Creed of Nicaea and in its Twenty Canons nothing was mentioned about the Roman Emperor. Nothing at all.

Those who posit that Constantine founded the Catholic Church either with the Edict of Milan or by calling together the First Council of Nicaea are unable prove their claim. There is no documentation from that time, either explicit or implicit by historian or theologian that even hints that such an event transpired or was the intention of Constantine or the bishops of the Catholic Church to transpire.
This story, most famously told by Jehovah's Witnesses and Fundamentalist Protestants, came out of their necessity to support their lie that there was an apostasy in the early Church. It is their way to explain how their reform and late arrival is justifiable. The myth is that because the Church of the Apostles fell in to apostasy, a remnant of the true and orthodox believers of Jesus remained hidden from and often persecuted by the Catholic Church until THEY brought the reform and true faith back. Prior the rise of Protestantism, no one ever dared to tell this lie. Only in the space of the unintelligent, uncurious, and hostile can such a myth and lie bear fruit.
Sources:
* Jurgen, William A. The Faith of the Early Fathers. Volume One. The Liturgical Press. Collegeville, Minnesota. 1970
* Lasseter Rollin A. ed. Light to the Nations. Part One. Catholic Textbook Project. 2014.
___________________________________________
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
heretoeternity said:
Revelation 17 of the Bible is very clear what God thinks of the Roman church...and 18 very clear on how it will be destroyed, because of it's spiritual fornication and evil it has spread throughout the world...as God says in Revelation "come out of her" unless of course you want to be destroyed along with her!
:
Revelation 17 is nothing to do with the "Roman Church". It is about pagan Rome.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The catacombs of St.Callixtus are among the greatest and most important of Rome. They originated about the middle of the second century and are part of a cemeterial complex. In it were buried tens of martyrs, 16 popes and very many Christians.

Perhaps the world's oldest-known image of Mary depicting her nursing the Infant Jesus. 3rd century, Catacomb of Priscilla, Rome



240px-Madonna_catacomb.jpg
WHAT ARE THE ROMAN CATACOMBS?

The catacombs are underground tunnels that were forged out of soft rock. They are long, marrow winding corridors. The dead were buried in the walls on either side. From time to time, going through these corridors, one comes to a wider space like a room. In these rooms the Christians would gather for the sacrifice of the Mass so as to worship free from the pagan’s persecutions.

Burial in the catacombs stopped when the barbarians plundered Rome. The popes removed the relics of the saints and martyrs from the catacombs. The catacombs, once abandoned, were gradually forgotten and not discovered again until the end of the sixteenth century. Most famous of the catacombs is that of St. Callistus, where many of the popes were buried after they were martyred for the faith.

HOW THE CATACOMBS BEAR WITNESS TO THE TRUE CATHOLIC FAITH TODAY

An authentic Catholic catechism, containing to true Catholic teachings, could be composed from the pictures and inscriptions on the tombs and walls of ancient catacombs of the first three centuries. Pictures, medals, and inscriptions in the catacombs identify the faith of the early Christians with the Catholic faith.

The catacombs prove that the first Christians believed that Jesus Christ is true God and true Man. They also believed in the Real Presence of Jesus in the holy Eucharist, the divine institution of the papacy, the dignity of the mother of God, the intercession of the saints, purgatory, prayers for the deceased.

The emblem of the fish, ichthys, was frequently used in the catacombs. It is a symbol of the Lord Jesus, for the Greek word ichthys means “fish” and its letters are the initials for “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.” When Christians spoke of “receiving the fish”, they meant to receive Jesus in Holy communion.

Frequently, pictures of our Savior in the catacombs reveal him as the Good Shepherd., carrying the lost sheep on his shoulders. This is the ancient biblical form which reveals the same message as our modern devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. A number of people are sitting around a table on which is bread and fish.

Death and resurrection were often in the minds of the early Christians, as indicated by the pictures of Noah and the ark, Jonah and the whale, Daniel in the lions’ den, and the raising of Lazarus. Their faith in resurrection and eternal life gave them courage in facing death under persecution. There is also the famous account of Tarsicius being martyred as he took the holy Eucharist, the bread of life, to Christian prisoners.

The eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass was offered in the catacombs on the altars under which rested the bodies of martyrs. Catholic altars even today have “altar stones” in which the relics of saints and martyrs were placed by bishops when they consecrated the altar stones. (similar to Rev. 6:9)

A Catechism of the Catholic Church, by Robert J. Fox. Franciscan Herald Press, pgs. 20, 21
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Mungo said:
Revelation 17 is nothing to do with the "Roman Church". It is about pagan Rome.
I have him on ignore. He is so full of hate he can't read, just "pope" Dave Hunt and such Whore duh Babble-on psychos.

THE LIES OF DAVE HUNT

Some anti-Catholics claim the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18. Dave Hunt, in his 1994 book, A Woman Rides the Beast, presents nine arguments to try to prove this. His claims are a useful summary of those commonly used by Fundamentalists, and an examination of them shows why they don’t work.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If the RCC is the true church then why does it worship idols and seem to worship the Pope. When people started to worship Paul, he told them not to do it. But the Pope glories in his exalted position and wears special robes that set himself up above the masses.

In my opinion, the Pope shows he is above the common man and is next to God almighty. The Priests also think of themselves as god because they can absolve a person of that person's sins. --- In other words it is my opinion that the RCC has set it's self between God and man and that is just another religion.

I have to laugh about religions because it is a mater of fact that in the Islands of the Pacific, men set themselves up as religious leaders because of their convincing people that they spoke for the god of the volcano. He then, after getting the people to believe in what he said, he used his self attained power to select sacrifices for that god. Since the people believed him they would do as he said or it would be their children that was selected. I call that religious intimidation. In my opinion that is the past of the RCC church. They used intimidation to get money from the Kings of nations that had Christian people in them. After all, the Kings didn't want to be thrown out of the church.

Now I am sure anyone with the catholic belief system will disagree and will say many things, mostly about me, I don't care. I have a right to what I believe and to post it just as they have that same right and use it all the time.
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
H. Richard said:
If the RCC is the true church then why does it worship idols and seem to worship the Pope. When people started to worship Paul, he told them not to do it. But the Pope glories in his exalted position and wears special robes that set himself up above the masses.

In my opinion, the Pope shows he is above the common man and is next to God almighty. The Priests also think of themselves as god because they can absolve a person of that person's sins. --- In other words it is my opinion that the RCC has set it's self between God and man and that is just another religion.

I have to laugh about religions because it is a mater of fact that in the Islands of the Pacific, men set themselves up as religious leaders because of their convincing people that they spoke for the god of the volcano. He then, after getting the people to believe in what he said, he used his self attained power to select sacrifices for that god. Since the people believed him they would do as he said or it would be their children that was selected. I call that religious intimidation. In my opinion that is the past of the RCC church. They used intimidation to get money from the Kings of nations that had Christian people in them. After all, the Kings didn't want to be thrown out of the church.

Now I am sure anyone with the catholic belief system will disagree and will say many things, mostly about me, I don't care. I have a right to what I believe and to post it just as they have that same right and use it all the time.
Are you serious that you claim the right to post slanderous accusations without even any evidence to back them up?

"But now put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and foul talk from your mouth." (Col 3:8)

"So put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander." (1Pet 2:1)
 

ScaliaFan

New Member
Apr 2, 2016
795
6
0
The Church began at the beginning.

first there was the Jewish religion. Then Jesus came and Peter was the first pope, the other 11 bishops

and we have had 265 or thereabouts... popes since the beginning

this latest one does not seem Catholic in the least... he sounds very heretical
 

heretoeternity

New Member
Oct 11, 2014
1,237
39
0
85
Asia/Pacific
Revelation 17 is nothing to do with the "Roman Church". It is about pagan Rome.
LOL...you are in denial...read Revelation carefully and you will see the scarlet and purple beast being the pagan Roman system, and the woman riding the beast is none other than the Roman church...read it and weep if you must!
 

ScaliaFan

New Member
Apr 2, 2016
795
6
0
Mungo said:
Are you serious that you claim the right to post slanderous accusations without even any evidence to back them up?

"But now put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and foul talk from your mouth." (Col 3:8)

"So put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander." (1Pet 2:1)
Thank you
heretoeternity said:
LOL...you are in denial...read Revelation carefully and you will see the scarlet and purple beast being the pagan Roman system, and the woman riding the beast is none other than the Roman church...read it and weep if you must!
i think the anti-Christ would tend to be anti-Christ

Catholics love Jesus, so i tend to think... could be wrong but tend to think that excludes them...
 

ScaliaFan

New Member
Apr 2, 2016
795
6
0
it's pretty ironic... someone accusing 1 billion or more people he/she doesn't even know.. of being anti-Christ

all the while calling people names and hating away like mad...

that would be LOL if it weren't so pathetic... and if Hell did not loom around the corner...