What convinces you that the Catholic Church is the original church founded by Jesus? Being raised Catholic? Being a convert to the Catholic Church?
Announcement
Collapse
Calling all Catholics.
Collapse
X
-
Calling all Catholics.
. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJVTags: None
-
The Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, all trace their origins back to Jesus and his apostles or disciples', 'though things are a little fuzzy in the first couple of centuries. 'Catholic' only means 'according to/throughout the whole' (καθ᾽ ὅλοςholic. Originally, the word church was used for individual, local gatherings, but any concern, missionary or pastoral, for all believers throughout the world would be the origins of the catholic church. Those who seek to recognize their communion with all Christians throughout the world are catholic; those who seek to claim legitimacy only for an exclusivist group that refuses to recognize the status of other groups as true Christians are not particularly catholic, but rather sectarian in some sort. The rest is just politics.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostI am a convert to the Catholic Church, but that's what happens if you start out protestant but then becomes convinced that the Catholic Church is the church founded by Jesus.
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostBeautiful, complex, coherent theology. The idea of visible signs of unity among Christians and of consistent historical witness.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostThe Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, all trace their origins back to Jesus and his apostles or disciples', 'though things are a little fuzzy in the first couple of centuries. 'Catholic' only means 'according to/throughout the whole' (καθ᾽ ὅλοςholic. Originally, the word church was used for individual, local gatherings, but any concern, missionary or pastoral, for all believers throughout the world would be the origins of the catholic church. Those who seek to recognize their communion with all Christians throughout the world are catholic; those who seek to claim legitimacy only for an exclusivist group that refuses to recognize the status of other groups as true Christians are not particularly catholic, but rather sectarian in some sort. The rest is just politics.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostCan you support this (catholic) from the Apostolic authority known as Holy Scripture?אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostThe intersections and resonances between ecclesiology and mariology are pretty cool.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostNot sure what you're asking. I was just giving the meaning of the word 'catholic'. Do etymologies require biblical authority? Or are you asking about whether or not various ancient churches trace their origins back to apostles? The gospel of Matthew claims that Jesus gave authority to all apostles what he had previously given first to Peter, as the rock upon which he would build his church, thus Peter was considered the first among equals, a primacy of honor at least, though politically popes have tried to exercise other kinds of primacy. So it would seem that the author and community of the gospel of Matthew traced its origins back to the authority of Jesus, Peter, and the apostles. That good enough for you?
If you were to contrast the view between Peter being the rock and an opposing view that the revelation the Father gave Peter that Jesus was the Christ the Son of the living God was the rock. How would you support the former against the latter view? Thanks.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostHow so? Thanks.Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostMy agreement was not an essential here. Rather the arguments as to why you believe as you do were. Thanks.
If you were to contrast the view between Peter being the rock and an opposing view that the revelation the Father gave Peter that Jesus was the Christ the Son of the living God was the rock. How would you support the former against the latter view? Thanks.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostFirst, I would not necessarily endorse an artificial dichotomy between the two views that you mention. When in the history of the church is this dichotomy first introduced? That the person of Peter himself (and his faith) was considered important seems obvious from the fact that he continued to bear the name Cephas & Peter, which prior to this time was not a name in Aramaic or Greek. Even Paul, who was perhaps not the greatest fan of Peter and other apostles, refers to Peter by these names. And he bears the same witness to Peter's authority, and that of others among the earlier apostles, by going to visit Peter for two weeks and then later presents more developed and mature gospel preaching before Peter and the pillars of the church to confirm that he was not and had not been running in vain in his ministry. Paul was very conscious and perhaps even a bit defensive of his own calling by God himself and his own status as an apostle, but he has no problem acknowledging this sense of seeking confirmation of his gospel.Last edited by 37818; 05-24-2014, 04:07 PM.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostListen, there are more than one view which denies that Peter is the rock upon which Jesus built His church. I have held two of those views. That Christ was that Rock was one of them and now the view is the personal revelation given the believer. As in the case of Peter (Matthew 16:17; John 6:45). I would be interested in your refutation of the different views that contradict your church's view that it was built upon Peter. But you do not need to do that here.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostI'm still curious why you feel it necessary to endorse a dichotomy between the person of Simon Cephas (Peter) and his personal faith in the revelation granted to him?
Can you point to the origin of this dichotomy in the history of Christian thought?
Where do you first see anyone saying Cephas is not the rock but his faith is the rock?Who introduced this dichotomy?Until you present an adequate description of this view, I'm not inclined to refute something that is perhaps not adequately understood by either one of us.
Give me the origin of the idea. I may indeed very well agree with it, depending upon how it is expressed. I do not disagree with Mt 16,17 or Jn 6,45, if you are trying to say that these verses are the origin of this dichotomy.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment