Zone1 If your "church" doesn't go back to the time of Christ and the Apostles---how can you trust it?

[Meriweather]

What year did the Catholic church start?

The year Jesus gathered his Apostles and began proclaiming the Good News.

 

[Concerned American]

Wow, such ignorance.

You resemble that remark.
In 1611, when the Bible was first translated from Hebrew into English, a total of fourteen books of the Old Testament were deliberately removed. Why did the church and the Vatican destroy history?
We can still find traces of the missing books by reading the Old Testament.

• The Book of the Covenant : In Exodus, chap. 24, verse 7, Moses mentions the Book of the Covenant, but sadly this book no longer exists in the modern Bible
• The Lord’s Book of Wars : The Lord’s Book of Wars also no longer exists. But a small passage was saved thanks to Moses who quotes it in Numbers, chapter 21, verse 14:
• The Book of the Just : In the same way, Book of the Just disappeared from the Bible, yet it is explicitly mentioned and quoted by Joshua in his: Book of Joshua chapter 10, verse 13 and 14.
• The Book of the Deeds of Solomon: No quotation for the Book of the Deeds of Solomon, only a mention made by the prophet Jeremiah in: 1 Kings, ch. 11, verse 41:
• The Book of Samuel – The Book of Nathan – The Book of Gad: No quotation even in 1 Chronicles, chapter 29, verse 29 and verse 30, but three books are mentioned: The Book of Samuel, the Book of Nathan and the Book of Gad:
• The Prophecy of Achia of Silo – The Visions of the Seer Iedò: Also Ezra mentions the Book of Nathan, plus two other books in, 2 Chronicles chapter 9 verse 29:
• The Acts of the Prophet Semaia – The Acts of the seer Iddo : Also Ezra, in 2 Chronicles, chapter 12, verse 15, mentions two other books:
• The Book of Ozai
• Finally, Ezra mentions the book of Ozai in 2 Chronicles, chapter 33, verse 19:

The Bible as we know it is a partial version strongly accepted by the ecclesiastical hierarchy. There are actually several missing books that have been lost that are referred to in the Holy Scriptures themselves. For example The Book of Numbers mentions the Book of the Battles of Jahvé, of which no copies have survived, or the first and second Book of Kings, and the first and second Book of Chronicles, refer to Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, of which there is no trace.”

Altogether we have many books cited or mentioned by the authors of the Old Testament, which disappeared into thin air. It is impossible to answer a precise why, even if many have a solid idea.

One moment, please...

www.monkeyandelf.com

 

[Votto]

It started when Jesus started it. I believe the Church says that it started when He died on the Cross. Or the Resurrection. Either way, we know it did not begin with the humanoid Luther in the 16th century or with Joel Olsteen in the 21st

I'll try again, when was the first utterance, "Catholic church" attempted?

We know when Christ came, but when was the official Catholic church, which you are touting, first established?

 

[ninja007]

You still haven't answered

Name any other purported "church" that can claim to go back that far (AD 107).


Actually, the Catholic Church goes back to the time of Christ, the Resurrection

But again, a lot of ancient writings have been lost

Having a pedigree of apostolic succession or being able to trace a church’s roots back to the "first church" is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church. What is given is repeated comparisons between what false teachers teach and what the first church taught, as recorded in Scripture. Whether a church is the "true church" or not is determined by comparing its teachings and practices to that of the New Testament church, as recorded in Scripture.

 

[ninja007]

This dependence upon the Word of God, rather than following certain individual "founders" is seen again in Galatians 1:8-9, in which Paul states, "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed." Thus, the basis for determining truth from error is not based upon even WHO it is that is teaching it, “we or an angel from heaven,” but whether it is the same gospel that they had already received – and this gospel is recorded in Scripture.

 

[ninja007]

The New Testament church is the “original church” and the “one true church.” We can know this because it is described, in great detail, in Scripture. The church, as recorded in the New Testament, is God’s pattern and foundation for His church. On this basis, let’s examine the Roman Catholic claim that it is the “first church.” Nowhere in the New Testament will you find the “one true church” doing any of the following: praying to Mary, praying to the saints, venerating Mary, submitting to a pope, having a select priesthood, baptizing an infant, observing the ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper as sacraments, or passing on apostolic authority to successors of the apostles. All of these are core elements of the Roman Catholic faith. If most of the core elements of the Roman Catholic Church were not practiced by the New Testament Church (the first church and one true church), how then can the Roman Catholic Church be the first church? A study of the New Testament will clearly reveal that the Roman Catholic Church is not the same church as the church that is described in the New Testament.

 

[ninja007]

Scripture never mentions using "which church came first" as the basis for determining which is the "true" church. What it does teach is that one is to use Scripture as the determining factor as to which church is preaching the truth and thus is true to the first church. It is especially important to compare Scripture with a church’s teaching on such core issues as the full deity and humanity of Christ, the atonement for sin through His blood on Calvary, salvation from sin by grace through faith, and the infallibility of the Scriptures. The “first church” and “one true church” is recorded in the New Testament. That is the church that all churches are to follow, emulate, and model themselves after.

 

[Batcat]

You can't.

Jesus didn't wait until Martin Luther was born, became a priest and then defected, to start His Church. Luther broke away from... what?

the Church.

That Church existed LONG before Luther... 1521 years, to be exact (the year of this 91 Theses). So what happened in those first 1521 years?

I guess: not much. So say the Protestants.

So why did Martin Luther leave the Catholic Church?

Why did Martin Luther leave the Catholic Church?​

https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/what-reasons-martin-luther-left-catholic-church-787966

 

[Crick]

The first Church God established on Earth was the Jewish one and the Catholics kept a lot of those "perpetual ordinances" mentioned by the Jews in the Old T

But that was thousands of years after human culture began and the first religions appeared.

 

[onefour1]

The church Jesus established and passed on to the apostles fell into a state of Apostasy. Through the prophet Joseph Smith, Jesus reestablished his church on the earth again. For a history of the Great Apostasy, see

 

[1miseryindex]

Having a pedigree of apostolic succession or being able to trace a church’s roots back to the "first church" is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church. What is given is repeated comparisons between what false teachers teach and what the first church taught, as recorded in Scripture. Whether a church is the "true church" or not is determined by comparing its teachings and practices to that of the New Testament church, as recorded in Scripture.

Try reading the early Church Fathers, some of whom knew the Apostles

Or is that too big a task?

 

[1miseryindex]

The church Jesus established and passed on to the apostles fell into a state of Apostasy. T

Oh, so Jesus didn't keep His promise?

He promised that the very gates of Hell would not destroy His Church

See Mt 16:18

Did Jesus fail?!

 

[onefour1]

Oh, so Jesus didn't keep His promise?

He promised that the very gates of Hell would not destroy His Church

See Mt 16:18

Did Jesus fail?!

The score may change due to mankind's free will, but in the end God will prevail. The game isn't over yet.

 

[1miseryindex]

You resemble that remark.
In 1611, when the Bible was first translated from Hebrew into English, a total of fourteen books of the Old Testament were deliberately removed. Why did the church and the Vatican destroy history?
We can still find traces of the missing books by reading the Old Testament.

• The Book of the Covenant : In Exodus, chap. 24, verse 7, Moses mentions the Book of the Covenant, but sadly this book no longer exists in the modern Bible
• The Lord’s Book of Wars : The Lord’s Book of Wars also no longer exists. But a small passage was saved thanks to Moses who quotes it in Numbers, chapter 21, verse 14:
• The Book of the Just : In the same way, Book of the Just disappeared from the Bible, yet it is explicitly mentioned and quoted by Joshua in his: Book of Joshua chapter 10, verse 13 and 14.
• The Book of the Deeds of Solomon: No quotation for the Book of the Deeds of Solomon, only a mention made by the prophet Jeremiah in: 1 Kings, ch. 11, verse 41:
• The Book of Samuel – The Book of Nathan – The Book of Gad: No quotation even in 1 Chronicles, chapter 29, verse 29 and verse 30, but three books are mentioned: The Book of Samuel, the Book of Nathan and the Book of Gad:
• The Prophecy of Achia of Silo – The Visions of the Seer Iedò: Also Ezra mentions the Book of Nathan, plus two other books in, 2 Chronicles chapter 9 verse 29:
• The Acts of the Prophet Semaia – The Acts of the seer Iddo : Also Ezra, in 2 Chronicles, chapter 12, verse 15, mentions two other books:
• The Book of Ozai
• Finally, Ezra mentions the book of Ozai in 2 Chronicles, chapter 33, verse 19:

The Bible as we know it is a partial version strongly accepted by the ecclesiastical hierarchy. There are actually several missing books that have been lost that are referred to in the Holy Scriptures themselves. For example The Book of Numbers mentions the Book of the Battles of Jahvé, of which no copies have survived, or the first and second Book of Kings, and the first and second Book of Chronicles, refer to Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, of which there is no trace.”

Altogether we have many books cited or mentioned by the authors of the Old Testament, which disappeared into thin air. It is impossible to answer a precise why, even if many have a solid idea.

One moment, please...

www.monkeyandelf.com

I can't answer because this info sounds like BS

And you are like so many other anti Catholics: Accuse accuse accuse Catholics but when it looks like Protestants did or are doing the same thing... no problem!

Martin Luther threw out 7 of the Old Testament books and WANTED to throw out 4 from the New T. His colleagues persuaded him not to. He wanted to toss out James because it spoke of works in re salvation

 

[Libby von H]

You can't.

Jesus didn't wait until Martin Luther was born, became a priest and then defected, to start His Church. Luther broke away from... what?

the Church.

That Church existed LONG before Luther... 1521 years, to be exact (the year of this 91 Theses). So what happened in those first 1521 years?

I guess: not much. So say the Protestants.

The Catholics are wrong about the Bible and Pope Luther assured everyone that those 7 books are not from God.
Oops,he said James wasn't either. So maybe Pope Luther wasn't infallible.

IF you knew the demonic nature of Calvin's Double Predestination you would flee Protestantism

 

[1miseryindex]

Having a pedigree of apostolic succession or being able to trace a church’s roots back to the "first church" is nowhere in Scripture given as a test for being the true church.

sorry, but if you think all truth and wisdom and means ofsalvation are to be found in Scripture alone... Even the Scriptures do not say that. in fact they say that if everything Jesus said and did were written down, it is doubtful the whole world could contain all the books.

That is why we have traditions that have been passed down for centuries since the death and Resurrection of Christ. There are ancient documents at the Vatican that are not all verbatim in the Bible, yet were written by people who knew the apostles..

 

[1miseryindex]

The Catholics are wrong about the Bible and Pope Luther assured everyone that those 7 books are not from God.
Oops,he said James wasn't either. So maybe Pope Luther wasn't infallible.

IF you knew the demonic nature of Calvin's Double Predestination you would flee Protestantism

um... what?

I would flee protestantism? I have never been a protestant... unless you speak of my younger days when I was somewhat rebellious, did not obey all that the Church taught... Boy, was that a disaster