Did the Catholic Church start when Constantine...

[Guest Guest]

Depending on which ones? :Bleh :ideas:

Oh -- I see, lets pick and choose. You asked for history, how about Ignatius of Antioch?

"Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2 [A.D. 110]).

[Guest Guest]

Oh -- I see, lets pick and choose. You asked for history, how about Ignatius of Antioch?

"Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church" (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2 [A.D. 110]).

I really suggest that you do a long study on the early church fathers. You will be enlightened, indeed. :smile

This will keep you busy. Landmarks of ENGLISH BIBLE: Manuscript Evidence...A Comprehensive Study in BIBLE INTRODUCTION.

Of course...the Word of God is right in the KJV 1611 AV Bible, though. :smile

[Guest Guest]

The group who formed what we know as the RCC were driven out of the early church because of they false heretical doctrine and later formed an alliance with Constantine the great about the year 312 AD.

Just stating something does not make it true. You people are making some extraordinary claims here. Therefore, it's incumbent upon you to back them up. Where is this so called "historical" evidence? All of this sounds like black helicopter/ UFO conspiracy theory stuff to me. So, prove it!

[Guest Guest]

I really suggest that you do a long study on the early church fathers. You will be enlightened, indeed. :smile

This will keep you busy. Landmarks of ENGLISH BIBLE: Manuscript Evidence...A Comprehensive Study in BIBLE INTRODUCTION.

Are you implying that I have not studied the church fathers? How rude. I give you historical record that puts the existence of the Catholic Church as far back as 110AD and all you can come up with is an insult and a reference to some obscure non-secular Baptist author?s work. That?s intellectually vapid.

Of course...the Word of God is right in the KJV 1611 AV Bible, though. :smile

KJV Onlyist Alert! I smell a reference to the ?trail of blood? coming. :thumb

[Guest Guest]

Are you implying that I have not studied the church fathers? How rude. I give you historical record that puts the existence of the Catholic Church as far back as 110AD and all you can come up with is an insult and a reference to some obscure non-secular Baptist author?s work. That?s intellectually vapid.



KJV Onlyist Alert! I smell a reference to the ?trail of blood? coming. :thumb

LOL...313 AD. Your History is incorrect. Nope...no trail of blood. A "smokescreen" maybe? :wave:

[pneu-engine]

So the early church fathers are to be ignored? Laughable. :Bleh

jj, you can laugh if you want to, but ask yourself this:::::::::::::

Where does the RCC fit in with all of Bible prophecy? The answer is that she is the full embodiment of Babylonianism, which is The Mystery of Iniquity, The great Whore of revelation and The Queen of Heaven just to name a few things.

[Guest Guest]

jj, you can laugh if you want to, but ask yourself this:::::::::::::

Where does the RCC fit in with all of Bible prophecy? The answer is that she is the full embodiment of Babylonianism, which is The Mystery of Iniquity, The great Whore of revelation and The Queen of Heaven just to name a few things.

Yes...and, he shouldn't be laughing at all. :sad

[pneu-engine]

Are you implying that I have not studied the church fathers? How rude. I give you historical record that puts the existence of the Catholic Church as far back as 110AD and all you can come up with is an insult and a reference to some obscure non-secular Baptist author?s work. That?s intellectually vapid.

Actually, jj, I can take you a whole lot farther back than that. Since the RCC is full Babylonianism it carries all the way back to Nimrod and his mother, Semiramis, just after The Great Flood.

You really need to pull out of that wicked and perverse organization of the RCC and become born into the kingdom of God.

[Guest Guest]

Actually, jj, I can take you a whole lot farther back than that. Since the RCC is full Babylonianism it carries all the way back to Nimrod and his mother, Semiramis, just after The Great Flood.

You really need to pull out of that wicked and perverse organization of the RCC and become born into the kingdom of God.

Yes...because that is where it all began, PE. Just right after the Great Flood.

All the Angels in Heaven...will be shouting praises for another child born into the kingdom of God.

Oh...How I love the Angels. :smile

[Pastor Matt]

**Sigh** Another member who joins for the sole purpose of breaking the rules. :sad

[Guest Guest]

**Sigh** Another member who joins for the sole purpose of breaking the rules. :sad

Double **sigh** BroMatt. It is a shame, too. The Kingdom of God is so glorious...man cannot completely comprehend in our finite minds how beautiful heaven will be. My prayers go out... :pray

[Guest Guest]

Yes...and, he shouldn't be laughing at all. :sad

You mean your interpretation of Bible prophecy. There are various interpretations of scripture - including Revelations. So, to which interpretation of Revelations do you hold? Historicist? Preterist? Futurist? These are not exclusive to the RCC mind you, but are held by many "flavors" of Protestantism. So, to which do you hold and why is your interpretation better than mine, or the other 150 people that attend your church? What about the protestant church down the road? They interpret scripture differently than you. If you interpret scripture via the Holy Spirit, then how is it that there are so many different interpretations? My point is, you can say what ever you want and that does not make it fact.

Paraphrasing your founder Martin Luther... "Scripture is like a wax nose; you can twist it any way you wish."

Now - enough with the grandstanding... show me some evidence for your claims.

BTW, I was a cradle Southern Baptist. My family roots in the SBC go back 175 years. I found truth in the RCC, so don?t try this bible thumping on me or I?ll thump you right back. :thumb

[Pastor Matt]

I So, to which do you hold and why is your interpretation better than mine, or the other 150 people that attend your church? What about the protestant church down the road?

It is this kind of sarcasm that got you the first warning. Keep up this "I am better than you" attitude or you will receive another.

[Guest Guest]

It is this kind of sarcasm that got you the first warning. Keep up this "I am better than you" attitude or you will receive another.

After all...we don't call you the "Big Stick Wielder" for nothing, BroMatt. :hehe:

[Guest Guest]

It is this kind of sarcasm that got you the first warning. Keep up this "I am better than you" attitude or you will receive another.

OK -- show my in that statement where I said that I am better than you or anyone else? I simply asked a exegetical question and you respond now with a threat. I will ask you again...to which inpterpretation of Revelations do you hold -- Preterist, Historicist, or Futurist?

Look - we are all brothers and sisters in Christ and there is no need to get defensive. Therefore, I will repeat my initial statement. Some very serious charges were made here against the RCC so, by logical discourse, it is incumbent upon you to provide evidence to bolster those charges. To me, the truth is all important. I did not come by my faith based soley upon what someone else told me. I am interested in serious appologetics here. Am I in the wrong place for this discussion? Intellectual honesty is ALL I am asking.