Why do they hate being called Christians

[epostle1]

Jesus just as I said.

Just as you ignore the numerous scriptures in post #78. That's a dishonest answer to a simple question.

Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

and His church, this one

1Pe 2:3 If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious.
1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.

You are quoting from a book that was canonized by Catholic bishops in the 4th century, the same Church you demonize. I hope you get to the root of your anger and resolve it. Blaming the Church for everything gone wrong in your life isn't rational, but it's typical for bitter ex-Catholics

 

[Marymog]

You are quoting from a book that was canonized by Catholic bishops in the 4th century, the same Church you demonize. I hope you get to the root of your anger and resolve it. Blaming the Church for everything gone wrong in your life isn't rational, but it's typical for bitter ex-Catholics

How do we know they were Catholic bishops? Maybe they were just Bishops of local churches?

 

[Marymog]

THANK YOU for posting this link because it encapsulates the historical lies about the Church that we're talking about.
in the article you lined, it says the following:

The Holocaust
Pope Pius XII never publicly condemned the Nazis' persecution of Jews, even when they were being rounded up and deported from Rome. His silence is partly blamed for the failure of Germany's Catholics to resist Hitler. Anti-Jewish Catholic doctrines such as the claim that the Jews murdered Christ were said to have ideologically underpinned nazism. Vatican officials allegedly helped Nazis escape Europe after the war.
This is laughable - even to a third grader reading a history book.

Not only did Pius XII save more Jews than Oskar Schindler - he was hailed by post war Israel as a HERO of the Jews for his tireless efforts in decrying Nazism and for rescuing endangered Jews. In fact, after the war - the Chief Rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli converted to the Catholic Church and took Pius XII's birth name as his Baptismal name, "Eugenio" (Pacelli).

He would have been disgusted in your ignorant attack.
What an unmitigated crock . . .

I read a book by Rabbi David G. Dalin who is a professor of History and Political Science. He is the author of a book The Myth of Hitler's Pope: How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews from the Nazis
His book says that not only did Pope Pius protect and defend the Jews during World War II, but that there has been support for Jewish people since at least the fourth century by The Catholic Church.

I have researched his book and this subject extensively and have found that anti-Catholic people really need to be honest and stop attacking Pope Pius. He was a good man.

I didn't know about Zolli's conversion (or forgot about it) and researched your statement. I found out in his autobiography (Before the Dawn: Autobiographical Reflections by Eugenio Zolli, Former Chief Rabbi of Rome) Zolli said that he experienced a vision of Jesus.

Zolli and his second wife converted to Catholicism and he was baptized by Father Paolo Dezza and his godfather was Father Augustin Bea who was a confessor of Pope Pius XII.

Truly a fascinating story.

God bless.

Mary

 

[FHII]

How do we know they were Catholic bishops? Maybe they were just Bishops of local churches?

I actually brought this up in another thread. The Catholic Church claims it started with Jesus an Peter. That has been a big dispute lately. But whether they want to admit it or not, the Catholic Church hijacked a few centuries of history.

I likened it to calling the Cleveland Browns Superbowl Champs. They never were, but before there was a Superbowl they were champions of the NFL.

I have researched it and can't pinpoint when the Catholic Church really came to be called such. The Nicene council? 900 AD? There are reasons to believe these dates.

My best conclusion is that over time it evolved into what is now the Catholic Church.

 

[BreadOfLife]

How do we know they were Catholic bishops? Maybe they were just Bishops of local churches?

This is how we know . . .

The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified. It was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo eleven years later (393). 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 Bishops at Carthage, which included St. Augustine stated that the Church in Rome must be consulted for approval of their document.
That's how we know they were Catholic Bishops.

 

[mjrhealth]

You are quoting from a book that was canonized by Catholic bishops in the 4th century, the same Church you demonize. I hope you get to the root of your anger and resolve it. Blaming the Church for everything gone wrong in your life isn't rational, but it's typical for bitter ex-Catholic

Anger, im not the one running around crying "persecution". But dont worry, for teh first time ever i will stop, i fear teh more truth you get the more "hated" you will feel its actually "offense". this bit

Mat 15:12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
Mat 15:13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Your church never gave us teh Holy Spirit, teh Spirit of truth nor can it give us revelation they alone come from God to those who believe.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Anger, im not the one running around crying "persecution". But dont worry, for teh first time ever i will stop, i fear teh more truth you get the more "hated" you will feel its actually "offense". this bit

Mat 15:12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
Mat 15:13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Your church never gave us teh Holy Spirit, teh Spirit of truth nor can it give us revelation they alone come from God to those who believe.

And in context, Jesus was talking about the PHARISEES, Einstein.
Then again, maybe He was referring the the "Generals" in your little cult, "aggressivechristianity.net" . . .

 

[mjrhealth]

Then again, maybe He was referring the the "Generals" in your little cult, "aggressivechristianity.net" . .

Have you not read " I am the way the truth and the life says the Lord no man shall go to heaven except through me, Now if doing what Christ said and following "Him" is a cult Id hate to think of what catholism is. Still dont understand why you have so many problems with Jesus. You know this bit, taking up the cross and following Him. As for aggressive, we are not the ones in continual "shouting" mode. As for pharisees. ye you hit the nail right on the head.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Have you not read " I am the way the truth and the life says the Lord no man shall go to heaven except through me, Now if doing what Christ said and following "Him" is a cult Id hate to think of what catholism is. Still dont understand why you have so many problems with Jesus. You know this bit, taking up the cross and following Him. As for aggressive, we are not the ones in continual "shouting" mode. As for pharisees. ye you hit the nail right on the head.

Thank you for finally admitting that Jesus was talking about the Pharisees in Matt. 15:12-24 - and NOT the Church.

As for your cult, "aggressivechristianity.net" - it was established by flawed, sinful human beings in the early 1980's. That makes it about 35 years old.
The Catholic Church, however, has been around for TWO THOUSAND years and was established by Jesus Christ.

Finally - I don't have a problem with Jesus because I don't have a problem with His Church, which is HIS Body.
Since you're still having trouble understanding what His Church is - allow me to provide you with the Scriptural facts . . .

- Jesus established ONE Church (Matt. 16:16-19). He prayed fervently that this Church remain ONE - as He and the Father are ONE (John 17:20-23).
There is NO other.

- Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).

- Jesus promised His Church that the Holy Spirit would guide her to ALL Truth (John 16:12-15).

- The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).

- The Church is the Body of Christ and He is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-31, Eph. 4:3-6, Col. 1:8).

- The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).

- Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).

- Jesus gave the Church supreme Authority on earth and whatever it ordains on earth is also ordained in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19, 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 20:21-23).

So, you see, my ignorant friend - it's NOT Jesus OR the Church.
The two are inseparable.

So, if YOU have a problem with the Church - you have a problem with HIM . . .

 

[epostle1]

What Church did you go to and who was the Priest?

He probably doesn't remember. Ex-Catholics usually leave the Church after grade 8, the ripe age of 13 when they know everything. Then they get scooped up by storefront evangelicals who brainwash them on the "evil" Catholic Church. That's why ex-Catholics become anti-Catholics. They are attracted to bible cults because they have no friends. But deep down they are angry at something that went wrong in their life, and blame everything on the "evil" Catholic Church. It's easier to blame a symbol of authority than anything authoritive, be it parents or society or their sorry lot in life. It's not the Church they despise, but a caricature. That's just my theory.

How do we know they were Catholic bishops? Maybe they were just Bishops of local churches?

The Church could not have functioned if they were anything else.
Independent Evangelical churches follow the Baptist Successionist idea that the early church was de-centralized. They like to imagine that the early Christians met in their homes for Bible study and prayer, and that in this pure form they existed independently of any central authority. It is easy to imagine that long ago in the ancient world transportation and communication was rare and difficult and that no form of centralized church authority could have existed even if it was desirable.

The most straightforward reading of the Acts of the Apostles shows this to be untrue, and a further reading of early church documents shows this to be no more than a back-projected invention. In the Acts of the Apostles what we find is a church that is immediately centralized in Jerusalem. When Peter has his disturbing vision in which God directs him to admit the Gentiles to the Church, he references back at once to the apostolic leadership in Jerusalem.(Acts 11:2)

The mission of the infant church was directed from Jerusalem, with Barnabas and Agabus being sent to Antioch (Acts 11:22,27) The Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) was convened to decide on the Gentile decision and a letter of instruction was sent to the new churches in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia. (Acts 15:23) We see Philip, John Mark, Barnabas and Paul traveling to and from Jerusalem and providing a teaching and disciplinary link from the new churches back to the centralized church in Jerusalem.

After the martyrdom of James the leadership shifts to Peter and Paul. The authority is not centered on Jerusalem, but through their epistles to the various churches, we see a centralized authority that is vested in Peter and Paul as apostles. This central authority was very soon focused on Rome, so that St Ignatius, a bishop of the church in Antioch would write to the Romans in the year 108 affirming that their church was the one that had the “superior place in love among the churches.’”
Authority of the First Popes

 

[mjrhealth]

I don't have a problem with His Church, which is HIS Body.

Ignorant now how can your church be His church,

What was it He said


John 8:44
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Now we have already established that your church is as corrupt as all of mens churches, so unless Jesus is teh devil your church can not be His for He is not a murderer a liar or a thief

and


Matthew 21:12-13
12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them that sold doves,
13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

Yes our wonderful Lord is Head of His church made up of Living stones, not brick and mortar, for He is the cornerstone that was rejected and teh foundation of our faith and we are the stones of which He is building It., upon revelation which is from God alone.

Your religion and all mens religions have nothing on God. You have nothing to ofeer that He cant give, but He gives us salvation which your church cannot. Oh and life for it is Christ alone.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Ignorant now how can your church be His church,

What was it He said
John 8:44
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Now we have already established that your church is as corrupt as all of mens churches, so unless Jesus is teh devil your church can not be His for He is not a murderer a liar or a thief

and
Matthew 21:12-13
12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them that sold doves,
13 And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.

Yes our wonderful Lord is Head of His church made up of Living stones, not brick and mortar, for He is the cornerstone that was rejected and teh foundation of our faith and we are the stones of which He is building It., upon revelation which is from God alone.

Your religion and all mens religions have nothing on God. You have nothing to ofeer that He cant give, but He gives us salvation which your church cannot. Oh and life for it is Christ alone.

Ummm, look - Einstein - John 8:44 has NOTHING to do with the Church. It has NOTHING to do with Christianity.
Jesus was addressing the Jews who were arguing with Him.

As for your abuse of Matt. 21:12-13 - this has NOTHING to do with the Church.
Jesus was addressing those who had made the Temple into a marketplace.

The fact is that you have proven time and again that you know NOTHING of God's Word. You sling verses like a spoiled child who throws rocks at windows - hoping to break one. You simply don't understand what the Church is - even though I educated you about it on several occasions.

The Church isn't a building.
The Church isn't a gaggle of Lone Rangers operating on their own - like YOU.
The Church isn't a man made cult led by "generals" like your "aggressive.net".
The Church isn't a man made religion.

The Church IS the mystical BODY of Christ and HE is the Head (Col. 1:18).
The Church IS many parts working together as ONE (1 Cor. 12) - and ALL the parts need each other.
The Church IS the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
The Church IS the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
Christ and His Church are inseparable (Acts 9:4-5).

Stop simply quoting your Bible and LEARN what it means . . .

 

[epostle1]

There is not one verse in the Bible that pits the Bible against the Church. That is a false man made tradition.

 

[Marymog]

I actually brought this up in another thread. The Catholic Church claims it started with Jesus an Peter. That has been a big dispute lately. But whether they want to admit it or not, the Catholic Church hijacked a few centuries of history.

I likened it to calling the Cleveland Browns Superbowl Champs. They never were, but before there was a Superbowl they were champions of the NFL.

I have researched it and can't pinpoint when the Catholic Church really came to be called such. The Nicene council? 900 AD? There are reasons to believe these dates.

My best conclusion is that over time it evolved into what is now the Catholic Church.

HI FHII,

This is the earliest writing I can find which shows a clear distinction between The Catholic Church and any other church: The very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called Catholic, when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house”. (St. Augustine Against the Letter of Mani Called "The Foundation" A.D. 397).

My research shows the Catholic Church probably identified itself as Catholic BEFORE 397 since Augustine is probably just repeating what is already known. Your research actually put the Catholic Church earlier (Nicene Council 325AD) than what I could find.

That is certainly earlier than any other church according to my research.

That's my two cents worth.

 

[FHII]

HI FHII,

This is the earliest writing I can find which shows a clear distinction between The Catholic Church and any other church: The very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called Catholic, when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house”. (St. Augustine Against the Letter of Mani Called "The Foundation" A.D. 397).

My research shows the Catholic Church probably identified itself as Catholic BEFORE 397 since Augustine is probably just repeating what is already known. Your research actually put the Catholic Church earlier (Nicene Council 325AD) than what I could find.

That is certainly earlier than any other church according to my research.

That's my two cents worth.

Thanks... Very interesting. I would agree that Augustine probably used the term that was already in use. Either well established or out of wanting to establish it.

It seems that the term probably came up in the 300's then.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Thanks... Very interesting. I would agree that Augustine probably used the term that was already in use. Either well established or out of wanting to establish it.

It seems that the term probably came up in the 300's then.

Actually - no.
Ignatius of Antioch used the term in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans around AD 107.
In the late 2nd century document, The Martyrdom of Polycarp, the term is again uses as a TITLE, not a description.

 

[Marymog]

Actually - no.
Ignatius of Antioch used the term in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans around AD 107.
In the late 2nd century document, The Martyrdom of Polycarp, the term is again uses as a TITLE, not a description.

Hi BreadOfLife,

Wasn't Ignatius just talking about the catholic church (with a small "c") or universal church? All Christians living at the time? I can't imagine in 107AD there were any other churches competing with each other like we have today.

BTW....I am non-denominational and just follow the facts or history as long as it leads me to the truth.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

This is how we know . . .

The Synod of Rome (382) is where the canon was first formally identified. It was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo eleven years later (393). 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 Bishops at Carthage, which included St. Augustine stated that the Church in Rome must be consulted for approval of their document.
That's how we know they were Catholic Bishops.

Thank you BreadOfLife.

It seems the African (where Carthage is) Churches agreed with the Roman Church. I guess I can see what you are saying. They were universal (catholic) in their teachings and beliefs.

Mary

 

[FHII]

Actually - no.
Ignatius of Antioch used the term in his Letter to the Smyrnaeans around AD 107.
In the late 2nd century document, The Martyrdom of Polycarp, the term is again uses as a TITLE, not a description.

But was he talking about the Babylonian Catholic Church? Again.... A hijack of history.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Thank you BreadOfLife.

It seems the African (where Carthage is) Churches agreed with the Roman Church. I guess I can see what you are saying. They were universal (catholic) in their teachings and beliefs.

Mary

Uhhh, no - they were ALL part of the Catholic Church.
"Catholic Church" is the title of the Church - it's not a generic description.