Who founded your church?

[Philip James]

than to follow Rome .

Dear Amigo,

If Rome is your stumbling block, then come to the Feast with Alexandria, come with Constantinople..
But Come!

The Spirit and the bride say, "Come." Let the hearer say, "Come." Let the one who thirsts come forward, and the one who wants it receive the gift of life-giving water.

Gloria in excelcis Deo!

 

[BreadOfLife]

No . The mormons have the bible , but it dont mean they aint demonic infected . Lots of protestant churches
have had the bible , YET they teach falsely . Just cause Rome held onto the the canon , dont mean they did not twist stuff and lie .
HECK most churches do now adays . They false , they , just as many do , hold onto scripture, yet lie lie lie .
Even the KKK holds the glorious bible , BUT YA GOTTA KNOW they false . Even and the list goes on and on .
TRUE they did hold onto the true scriptures and copied them down faithfully they did . THEY never LIVED IT and often twisted it
but like many false ones , they had some truths too . Even satan said a part truth , yet we know he is a liar .
HE said to eve, ye shall be come as gods knowing good and evil , GOD said the same thing later ,they have become as us
knowing good and evil . BUT ya know satan is a liar . Even a broke clock is right twice a day .
Now everyone sit down for what i say next , EVEN POPE FRANCIS can say some truth . BUT I know what spirit that man is of
And it aint the HOLY ONE .

You don't have a CLUE about where your Bible came from, DO you?
Allow me to educate you . . .

For the first 300 years of the Church's existence - there was NO official Canon of Scripture. In other words - NO BIBLE.
There were MANY Books that were considered to be Scripture by the Early Church and were read aloud from pulpits during this time. Some of them include, The Shepherd of Hermas, Epistles of Barnabas, Letter of Clement, etc. There were some private lists - but NOTHING official.

- The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified.
- 11 years after that, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
- 4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.

Some of YOUR Protestant Fathers wanted to remove certain Books that they found tedious and "uninspired". Among these Books were the Epistles of James and Jude, Hebrews and Revelation.
If id hadn't been for their contemporaries - YOUR Protrestant Bible would be A LOT thinner than it already is.

Sooooooo, why do YOU follow a CATHOLIC Canon of Scripture if it's "demonic"??

 

[amigo de christo]

You don't have a CLUE about where your Bible came from, DO you?
Allow me to educate you . . .

For the first 300 years of the Church's existence - there was NO official Canon of Scripture. In other words - NO BIBLE.
There were MANY Books that were considered to be Scripture by the Early Church and were read aloud from pulpits during this time. Some of them include, The Shepherd of Hermas, Epistles of Barnabas, Letter of Clement, etc. There were some private lists - but NOTHING official.

- The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified.
- 11 years after that, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
- 4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.

Some of YOUR Protestant Fathers wanted to remove certain Books that they found tedious and "uninspired". Among these Books were the Epistles of James and Jude, Hebrews and Revelation.
If id hadn't been for their contemporaries - YOUR Protrestant Bible would be A LOT thinner than it already is.

Sooooooo, why do YOU follow a CATHOLIC Canon of Scripture if it's "demonic"??

i already knew where it came from . The scripture aint demonic . The church , that one , yeah
let me die long before i join it .

 

[BreadOfLife]

i already knew where it came from . The scripture aint demonic . The church , that one , yeah
let me die long before i join it .

You didn't answer my question:
why do YOU follow a CATHOLIC Canon of Scripture if the Catholic Church is "demonic"??

 

[amigo de christo]

You didn't answer my question:
why do YOU follow a CATHOLIC Canon of Scripture if the Catholic Church is "demonic"??

You can preach your church all day i wont join it .
Me , i am gonna focus on Christ , preaching HIM and all that HE said to do .
Good night everyone . Some folks get busy preaching their church , me i will simply point to Christ .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You can preach your church all day i wont join it .
Me , i am gonna focus on Christ , preaching HIM and all that HE said to do .
Good night everyone . Some folks get busy preaching their church , me i will simply point to Christ .

So, WHY are you afraid to answer the question?
This should be an EASY question for a guy who believes the Catholic Church to be "demonic".

Consider yourself exposed like ALL of the other ignorant anti-Catholics around here . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You can preach your church all day i wont join it .
Me , i am gonna focus on Christ , preaching HIM and all that HE said to do .
Good night everyone . Some folks get busy preaching their church , me i will simply point to Christ .

Funny - a Sola Scripturist who is afraid to say WHY he believes the Scriptures to be our "SOLE" rule of faith - especially when they came from a "demonic" source . . .

 

[DNB]

That would be the understatement of the year so far.

Yes, you're right, ....the last line was thrown in last minute for the sake of irony, not thought out much!

 

[DNB]

really?

1 or 2 episodes, I wouldn't recall the common expressions or clichés.

 

[DNB]

This is the kind of asinine response I expected from you.

John the Baptis't WASN'T an ascetic?? He was the textbook exapmple of asceticism. Others who chose the ascetic life, like the great saint Anthony of Egypt modeled their entire lives life after John. John was the POSTER BOY for self-mortification. He didn't wear a "hair shirt" because it was the latest desert fashion, as YOU foolishly claim. It was to mortify the flesh.

As to the Presbyters in James 5 - it states explicitly that THEIR prayers bring about the FORGIVENESS of sin on the sick person as well as the SALVATION of that person. And it says NOTHING about this being only something that was endowed to the Apostles and nobody else as YOU falsely claim.

Finally - your idiotic and paranoid rants about Jesuits are ridiculous. They are but ONE priestly order out of MANY - no more "powerful" than the next. Maybe if you had put down that Dan Brown novel and do some homework - you MIGHT have known this . . .

John was not an ascetic. Understand something simpleton, ascetism is not Biblical, not God-ordained. All wise men know that superficial acts like self-flagellation, uncomfortable living conditions, or vulgar food, do not edify the spirit, but are works of self-righteousness - ask Martin Luther.
Fasting is different, that's self-control and proving a health not derived from food, but faith. The principle to fasting, is not appearing as though you've fasted. Whereas, sleeping on rocks, not using salt in food, or suffering the cold when you have the means to warm yourself, does not elicit a spiritual fortitude, but a misguided attempt at piety. John knew this, ....unlike yourself, or allegedly your buddy Anthony of Egypt (the fool).

Listen ****, No ones prayers bring about anyone's salvation, that is figurative or supplementary in James, there is a conflation in James' thought in that passage. When one is sick, it does not pertain in any manner to salvation, but James coincided the two seemingly exclusive principles in order to reflect a correlation between health and righteousness. But, one is categorically, not derived from the other.
As usual, you have a hyper-literal and childish understanding of Scripture.

 

[Brakelite]

You don't have a CLUE about where your Bible came from, DO you?
Allow me to educate you . . .

For the first 300 years of the Church's existence - there was NO official Canon of Scripture. In other words - NO BIBLE.
There were MANY Books that were considered to be Scripture by the Early Church and were read aloud from pulpits during this time. Some of them include, The Shepherd of Hermas, Epistles of Barnabas, Letter of Clement, etc. There were some private lists - but NOTHING official.

- The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified.
- 11 years after that, it was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo (393).
- 4 years later, at the Council (or Synod) of Carthage (397), it was yet again confirmed. The bishops wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about confirming this canon". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
- 7 years later, in 405, in a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, he reiterated the canon.
- 14 years after that, at the 2nd Council (Synod) of Carthage (419) the canon was again formally confirmed.

The Canon of Scripture was officially closed at the Council of Trent in the 16th century because of the perversions happening within Protestantism and the random editing and deleting of books from the Canon.

Some of YOUR Protestant Fathers wanted to remove certain Books that they found tedious and "uninspired". Among these Books were the Epistles of James and Jude, Hebrews and Revelation.
If id hadn't been for their contemporaries - YOUR Protrestant Bible would be A LOT thinner than it already is.

Sooooooo, why do YOU follow a CATHOLIC Canon of Scripture if it's "demonic"??

I don't see anywhere in your treatise that offers any evidence for your church's contribution to either the inspiration or authorship of the scriptures. So I guess you did a good job of showing how the Bible didn't originate with the Catholic Church huh.

 

[theefaith]

His "demonic power to accept sins"??
Can you elaborate?

please? And what is the it you refer to?

 

[BreadOfLife]

John was not an ascetic. Understand something simpleton, ascetism is not Biblical, not God-ordained. All wise men know that superficial acts like self-flagellation, uncomfortable living conditions, or vulgar food, do not edify the spirit, but are works of self-righteousness - ask Martin Luther.
Fasting is different, that's self-control and proving a health not derived from food, but faith. The principle to fasting, is not appearing as though you've fasted. Whereas, sleeping on rocks, not using salt in food, or suffering the cold when you have the means to warm yourself, does not elicit a spiritual fortitude, but a misguided attempt at piety. John knew this, ....unlike yourself, or allegedly your buddy Anthony of Egypt (the fool).

Listen ****, No ones prayers bring about anyone's salvation, that is figurative or supplementary in James, there is a conflation in James' thought in that passage. When one is sick, it does not pertain in any manner to salvation, but James coincided the two seemingly exclusive principles in order to reflect a correlation between health and righteousness. But, one is categorically, not derived from the other.
As usual, you have a hyper-literal and childish understanding of Scripture.

Soooooo, the Holy Spirit was WRONG when speaking through James?
THANK YOU for exposing your counterfeit theology.

As for asceticism - WHO said anything about self-flagellation or sleeping on rocks being a "requirement"?? YOU have been reading WAY too many Dan Brown novels instead of studying Scripture and history. John the Baptist was the POSTER BOY for ascetics, with his sturdy examples of mortification of the flesh. He didn't wear a hair shirt and leather girdle because it was the "latest desert fachion" as YOU would have us believe.

Paul calls these disciplines of the flesh, “mortification” because by this denial of the body, we die to the flesh so as to live in the spirit:
"If you live after the flesh, you shall die, but if through the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live." (Romans 8:13; see also Col. 3:5, and Gal. 5:24).
Mortification is a good discipline for our souls as well as a means of strengthening our resistance to temptation.

Paul not only recommended mortification, he practiced it himself. In 1 Cor. 9:27, he tells us, “But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified”.

 

[theefaith]

Soooooo, the Holy Spirit was WRONG when speaking through James?
THANK YOU for exposing your counterfeit theology.

As for asceticism - WHO said anything about self-flagellation or sleeping on rocks being a "requirement"?? YOU have been reading WAY too many Dan Brown novels instead of studying Scripture and history. John the Baptist was the POSTER BOY for ascetics, with his sturdy examples of mortification of the flesh. He didn't wear a hair shirt and leather girdle because it was the "latest desert fachion" as YOU would have us believe.

Paul calls these disciplines of the flesh, “mortification” because by this denial of the body, we die to the flesh so as to live in the spirit:
"If you live after the flesh, you shall die, but if through the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live." (Romans 8:13; see also Col. 3:5, and Gal. 5:24).
Mortification is a good discipline for our souls as well as a means of strengthening our resistance to temptation.

Paul not only recommended mortification, he practiced it himself. In 1 Cor. 9:27, he tells us, “But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified”.

Oops you forgot to check with the Bible

Suffering Necessary part of Salvation!

Patience Implies suffering!

In order to bear fruit we must deny ourself, suffer, and die!

John 12:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

Jn 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

Our principal means of dying is baptism!

Rom 6:4
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Romans 6:3
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


More. Verses about suffering:

Matthew 10:38
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

Matthew 16:24
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Matthew 16:25
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

John 12:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

25
He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.

Romans 5:3
And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;

Romans 5:4
And patience, experience; and experience, hope:

Romans 8:17
And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

2 Corinthians 12:9
And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

Colossians 1:11
Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;

2 Timothy 2:12
If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

Phil 1:29
For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

James 1:2-8
My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing

Hebrews 6:12
That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

Hebrews 10:36
For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.

Hebrews 12:4
Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.

1 Peter 2:20
For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I don't see anywhere in your treatise that offers any evidence for your church's contribution to either the inspiration or authorship of the scriptures. So I guess you did a good job of showing how the Bible didn't originate with the Catholic Church huh.

The Catholic Church traces itself historically and Scripturally back to the Apostles, who WROTE the NT, along with their disciples.
YOUR sect - and EVERY OTHER Protestant sect can only go back as far as 500 years.

The Catholic Church wrote, compiled and declared the Canon of Scripture.
It's a genuinely Catholic Book . . .

 

[theefaith]

The Catholic Church traces itself historically and Scripturally back to the Apostles, who WROTE the NT, along with their disciples.
YOUR sect - and EVERY OTHER Protestant sect can only go back as far as 500 years.

The Catholic Church wrote, compiled and declared the Canon of Scripture.
It's a genuinely Catholic Book . . .

paul was shipwrecked at Malta
James went to Spain
Thomas to India
Peter and Paul to Rome
All catholic
The church existed before the New Testament and wrote the New Testament
for our instruction! Lk 1

Acts 8:3
As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.

and being converted to Christ and His church
Jesus and the church are one!
Saul Saul why does thou persecute me!
Acts 9

Hebrews 2:12
Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.

1. Matthew 18:17
   And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

 

[BarneyFife]

Papacy with the successors of Peter and the apostles yes him no I don’t think he is valid

You don't think Pope Francis is valid?

 

[theefaith]

You don't think Pope Francis is valid?

no nor the others since Pius 12 including Vatican II

 

[theefaith]

You can’t make a silk purse from a sows ear, who you calling a creature, you mean it romena, my chosen woman

hey bother figure leave my mother figure alone

 

[BarneyFife]

no nor the others since Pius 12 including Vatican II

But if each person gets to decide for themselves which popes are valid, doesn't that effectively undermine the authority of the Catholic Church, in general? (Serious question, not provocation) :)