Zone1 So you think God loves you

[jbrownson0831]

The church existed hundreds of years before the coming of the Catholic church inside the homes of private individuals.

The Church, like the kingdom of God Jesus described, are followers of his.

Exactly....

 

[forkintheroad7]

The church existed hundreds of years before the coming of the Catholic church inside the homes of private individuals.

The Church, like the kingdom of God Jesus described, are followers of his.

That is not true.

The Church was Catholic from the beginning. If people would study Early Church Fathers, many of whom knew the Apostles, they would find Catholic doctrine:

1) Transubstantiation in the early years of the Church (though not sure it was called that from the very beginning)

They will find 2) Confession to a priest

and so on...

They will find Catholic beliefs/practices

But few people study these things. I guess they figure all knowledge God wants them to have will fall out of the sky and knock them to the ground or something...

However, Jesus says Seek and you will find...

It's funny how so few have any interest in finding information about the Most Important Person of all and the Most Important entity of all, His Church... which has always taught (the Church, that is, not the corrupt Vatican) that there is no salvation outside it, which of course is logical if it is Christ's one Church.
It's sad

They are the ones who lose...

 

[hadit]

The church existed hundreds of years before the coming of the Catholic church inside the homes of private individuals.

The Church, like the kingdom of God Jesus described, are followers of his.

And that Church extends far beyond any arbitrary man-made boundaries or divisions. I believe we will be rubbing elbows on the New Earth with believers from all kinds of denominations, and those who want to insist theirs is somehow special will be in for a rude awakening.

 

[hadit]

That is not true.

The Church was Catholic from the beginning. If people would study Early Church Fathers, many of whom knew the Apostles, they would find

Transubstantiation in the early years of the Church (though not sure it was called that from the very beginning)

They will find Confession to a priest

They will find Catholicism

But few people study it. I guess they figure all knowledge God wants them to have will fall out of the sky and knock them to the ground or something... However, Jesus says Seek and you will find...

It's funny how so few have any interest in finding information about the Most Important Person of all and the Most Important entity of all, His Church.

It's sad

They are the ones who lose...

There would have been no need for the Reformation had the Church not been as corrupt as it was when the Reformers read the Bible for themselves.

 

[Votto]

That is not true.

The Church was Catholic from the beginning. If people would study Early Church Fathers, many of whom knew the Apostles, they would find Catholic doctrine:

1) Transubstantiation in the early years of the Church (though not sure it was called that from the very beginning)

They will find 2) Confession to a priest

and so on...

They will find Catholic beliefs/practices

But few people study these things. I guess they figure all knowledge God wants them to have will fall out of the sky and knock them to the ground or something...

However, Jesus says Seek and you will find...

It's funny how so few have any interest in finding information about the Most Important Person of all and the Most Important entity of all, His Church... which has always taught (the Church, that is, not the corrupt Vatican) that there is no salvation outside it, which of course is logical if it is Christ's one Church.
It's sad

They are the ones who lose...

History of early Christianity | Beliefs, Characteristics, Organization, & Map | Britannica

History of early Christianity, the development of the early Christian church from its roots in the Jewish community of Roman Palestine to the conversion of Constantine I and the convocation of the First Council of Nicaea. For a more extensive treatment of the history and beliefs of the Christian

www.britannica.com

The church spread with astonishing rapidity. Already in the Acts of the Apostles its movement from one headquarters to another can be traced: Jerusalem, Damascus, and Antioch; the missions of St. Paul to Asia Minor (Tarsus, Iconium, Ephesus, and Cyprus); the crossing to Macedonia (Philippi and Thessalonica) and Achaea (Athens and Corinth); and the beginnings in Rome. Other early evidence tells of more churches in Asia Minor and of Christians in Alexandria. Though Christianity found a springboard in Jewish synagogues, it owed even more to the crucial decision to open the church to gentiles without either circumcision or complete adherence to the Torah. Roman roads and the comparative security they offered also facilitated missionary work.

By the end of the 2nd century there were well-established churches in Gaul (Lyon, Vienne, and perhaps Marseille) and Latin Africa (Carthage), with perhaps a start in Britain, Spain and Roman Germany, though little is known of these areas for another century. To the east, Edessa soon became the centre of Syriac Christianity, which spread to Mesopotamia, the borders of Persia, and possibly India. Armenia adopted Christianity at the beginning of the 4th century, by which time there may have been a Christian majority, or near it, in some cities of Asia Minor and Roman Africa, while progress had been substantial in Gaul and Egypt. The faith had demonstrated its appeal to people of different cultures and environments.


This was not done without opposition. First, their stern moral standard (though attractive to some) and their fear of contamination by the idolatry woven into the texture of social life around them compelled many Christians to stand aloof from their neighbours. Second, the Roman state doubted their loyalty and became increasingly convinced that the growth of the Christian church was incompatible with the unity, safety, and prosperity of the empire. Serious action against the church corporately was not taken until Septimius Severus forbade conversion under pain of death (202), but long before him a tradition of administrative action against individual Christians and a presumption that they were wicked and dangerous people had been established. Nero had made Christians scapegoats for the fire of Rome in 64; prior to this, the Roman government had made little distinction between Christians and Jews. Although Trajan forbade magistrates to take the initiative against them, Christians denounced by others could be punished simply for persistence in their faith, the proof of which lay often in refusal to participate in the cult of the emperor. Persecution at Lyon in 177, when Marcus Aurelius abandoned Trajan’s principle “that they are not to be sought out,” pointed to what might come. Meanwhile, Apologists such as Justin, Tertullian, and Origen protested in vain that Christians were moral, useful, and loyal citizens.


In 250, eager to revitalize the empire on conservative lines, Decius ordered all citizens to worship the gods; persecution was extensive and many apostatized, but the church was not destroyed. Valerian tried new methods against the clergy and other leaders, martyring St. Cyprian and St. Sixtus II in 258, but the church held firm. His successor Gallienus granted toleration in practice and perhaps legal recognition. A period of comparative security was ended by the series of persecutions launched in 303 by Diocletian and Galerius. Harsh though they were, they entirely missed their objective. Public opinion, now better aware of the nature of Christianity, was revolted by the bloodshed; first Diocletian and later Galerius (311) acknowledged the failure of this policy. In 313 Constantine and Licinius agreed upon a policy of toleration of Christianity with the proclamation of the Edict of Milan; Constantine soon turned to active patronage of the church. Through nearly three centuries the martyrs had been the seed of the church, and now the accession of a Christian emperor changed the whole situation.


By this time the church had developed considerably in its organization, partly against these external pressures and partly in order to express its own nature as a historically continuous society with a corporate unity, a ministry, and distinct worship practices and sacraments. Not later than the first decades of the 2nd century there is evidence in Antioch and several Asian cities of congregations being governed by a single bishop assisted by a group of presbyters and a number of deacons. The bishop was the chief minister in worship, teaching, and pastoral care as well as the supervisor of all administration. The presbyters were collectively his council; individually the bishop might call upon them for help in any of his ministerial duties. The deacons came to be specially associated with the bishop in his liturgical office and in the administration of property, including assistance to the needy.


How far back this threefold ministry can be traced has long been a matter of controversy. It is certain that typical Christian groups, at least in cities, possessed a recognized ministry from their very beginnings, and it is almost as certain that the pattern of ministry was not derived from Greek models. The presbyters (elders) were clearly taken over from the Jewish synagogue; the bishop (where this title is not simply an alternative for presbyter) may be related to the supervisor of the communities known from the Dead Sea Scrolls. How and when the bishop came to be regarded as having authority over his presbyters and how such a “monarchical” bishop was related to the original apostles—whether by direct succession of appointment, by localization of missionary-founders, or by elevation from the presbyterate—remains uncertain. While apostles and other first-generation leaders were alive, there was understandably some fluidity in organization, with apostles, prophets, and teachers at work side by side with bishops, presbyters, and deacons; moreover, some New Testament terms may indicate at one time an office, at another a function.

Though the first local unit of organization must have been the congregation, the church was soon making use of the administrative divisions of the Roman Empire. Normally each bishop became responsible for the church in a recognized civitas; that is, an urban centre with its surrounding territorium. This was the diocese, the fundamental unit of ecclesiastical geography. The subdivision of a diocese into parishes was a much later development. By the late 2nd century, when heresy and other problems compelled the bishops to meet together in councils, they tended to group themselves according to the civil provinces. In the 3rd century there emerges clear evidence of the ecclesiastical province, usually coinciding in area with the civil province and accepting the bishop of the civil capital (metropolis) as its primate (metropolitan), a system which received canonical status and further precision at the Council of Nicaea (325). Besides such metropolitans, the bishops of a few outstanding sees acquired a special authority through a combination of the secular importance of the city and its place in missionary history as a mother church. In Egypt, for example, the bishop of Alexandria ruled six provinces, and in Latin Africa the bishop of Carthage was the accepted leader, though without juridical or canonical rights, of the whole area. The Council of Nicaea, while defining the canonical status of the provincial synods and metropolitans, reaffirmed the ancient customary privileges of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and certain other unnamed sees. Out of this the patriarchates of later times were developed.

 

[BreezeWood]

We stopped having VALID popes

at #260 (when Pius XII died)

True story, though few know this

biblical christianity has never had a heavenly representative of any significance or there would not be a 4th century christian bible ... the one written in that century.

 

[The Irish Ram]

That is not true.

The Church was Catholic from the beginning. If people would study Early Church Fathers, many of whom knew the Apostles, they would find Catholic doctrine:

1) Transubstantiation in the early years of the Church (though not sure it was called that from the very beginning)

They will find 2) Confession to a priest

and so on...

They will find Catholic beliefs/practices

But few people study these things. I guess they figure all knowledge God wants them to have will fall out of the sky and knock them to the ground or something...

However, Jesus says Seek and you will find...

It's funny how so few have any interest in finding information about the Most Important Person of all and the Most Important entity of all, His Church... which has always taught (the Church, that is, not the corrupt Vatican) that there is no salvation outside it, which of course is logical if it is Christ's one Church.
It's sad

They are the ones who lose...

Christ's church was started by Peter. It was in Jerusalem, where He preached for 15 years before his arrest.

 

[BreezeWood]

for the times in the future when we will not have a man like Trump... and you have to admit there are FEW like him.... so very few.

not true ...

they have been dominant throughout the centuries particularly an uninterrupted presence in the desert religions.

 

[forkintheroad7]

History of early Christianity | Beliefs, Characteristics, Organization, & Map | Britannica

History of early Christianity, the development of the early Christian church from its roots in the Jewish community of Roman Palestine to the conversion of Constantine I and the convocation of the First Council of Nicaea. For a more extensive treatment of the history and beliefs of the Christian

www.britannica.com

The church spread with astonishing rapidity. Already in the Acts of the Apostles its movement from one headquarters to another can be traced: Jerusalem, Damascus, and Antioch; the missions of St. Paul to Asia Minor (Tarsus, Iconium, Ephesus, and Cyprus); the crossing to Macedonia (Philippi and Thessalonica) and Achaea (Athens and Corinth); and the beginnings in Rome. Other early evidence tells of more churches in Asia Minor and of Christians in Alexandria. Though Christianity found a springboard in Jewish synagogues, it owed even more to the crucial decision to open the church to gentiles without either circumcision or complete adherence to the Torah. Roman roads and the comparative security they offered also facilitated missionary work.

By the end of the 2nd century there were well-established churches in Gaul (Lyon, Vienne, and perhaps Marseille) and Latin Africa (Carthage), with perhaps a start in Britain, Spain and Roman Germany, though little is known of these areas for another century. To the east, Edessa soon became the centre of Syriac Christianity, which spread to Mesopotamia, the borders of Persia, and possibly India. Armenia adopted Christianity at the beginning of the 4th century, by which time there may have been a Christian majority, or near it, in some cities of Asia Minor and Roman Africa, while progress had been substantial in Gaul and Egypt. The faith had demonstrated its appeal to people of different cultures and environments.


This was not done without opposition. First, their stern moral standard (though attractive to some) and their fear of contamination by the idolatry woven into the texture of social life around them compelled many Christians to stand aloof from their neighbours. Second, the Roman state doubted their loyalty and became increasingly convinced that the growth of the Christian church was incompatible with the unity, safety, and prosperity of the empire. Serious action against the church corporately was not taken until Septimius Severus forbade conversion under pain of death (202), but long before him a tradition of administrative action against individual Christians and a presumption that they were wicked and dangerous people had been established. Nero had made Christians scapegoats for the fire of Rome in 64; prior to this, the Roman government had made little distinction between Christians and Jews. Although Trajan forbade magistrates to take the initiative against them, Christians denounced by others could be punished simply for persistence in their faith, the proof of which lay often in refusal to participate in the cult of the emperor. Persecution at Lyon in 177, when Marcus Aurelius abandoned Trajan’s principle “that they are not to be sought out,” pointed to what might come. Meanwhile, Apologists such as Justin, Tertullian, and Origen protested in vain that Christians were moral, useful, and loyal citizens.


In 250, eager to revitalize the empire on conservative lines, Decius ordered all citizens to worship the gods; persecution was extensive and many apostatized, but the church was not destroyed. Valerian tried new methods against the clergy and other leaders, martyring St. Cyprian and St. Sixtus II in 258, but the church held firm. His successor Gallienus granted toleration in practice and perhaps legal recognition. A period of comparative security was ended by the series of persecutions launched in 303 by Diocletian and Galerius. Harsh though they were, they entirely missed their objective. Public opinion, now better aware of the nature of Christianity, was revolted by the bloodshed; first Diocletian and later Galerius (311) acknowledged the failure of this policy. In 313 Constantine and Licinius agreed upon a policy of toleration of Christianity with the proclamation of the Edict of Milan; Constantine soon turned to active patronage of the church. Through nearly three centuries the martyrs had been the seed of the church, and now the accession of a Christian emperor changed the whole situation.


By this time the church had developed considerably in its organization, partly against these external pressures and partly in order to express its own nature as a historically continuous society with a corporate unity, a ministry, and distinct worship practices and sacraments. Not later than the first decades of the 2nd century there is evidence in Antioch and several Asian cities of congregations being governed by a single bishop assisted by a group of presbyters and a number of deacons. The bishop was the chief minister in worship, teaching, and pastoral care as well as the supervisor of all administration. The presbyters were collectively his council; individually the bishop might call upon them for help in any of his ministerial duties. The deacons came to be specially associated with the bishop in his liturgical office and in the administration of property, including assistance to the needy.


How far back this threefold ministry can be traced has long been a matter of controversy. It is certain that typical Christian groups, at least in cities, possessed a recognized ministry from their very beginnings, and it is almost as certain that the pattern of ministry was not derived from Greek models. The presbyters (elders) were clearly taken over from the Jewish synagogue; the bishop (where this title is not simply an alternative for presbyter) may be related to the supervisor of the communities known from the Dead Sea Scrolls. How and when the bishop came to be regarded as having authority over his presbyters and how such a “monarchical” bishop was related to the original apostles—whether by direct succession of appointment, by localization of missionary-founders, or by elevation from the presbyterate—remains uncertain. While apostles and other first-generation leaders were alive, there was understandably some fluidity in organization, with apostles, prophets, and teachers at work side by side with bishops, presbyters, and deacons; moreover, some New Testament terms may indicate at one time an office, at another a function.

Though the first local unit of organization must have been the congregation, the church was soon making use of the administrative divisions of the Roman Empire. Normally each bishop became responsible for the church in a recognized civitas; that is, an urban centre with its surrounding territorium. This was the diocese, the fundamental unit of ecclesiastical geography. The subdivision of a diocese into parishes was a much later development. By the late 2nd century, when heresy and other problems compelled the bishops to meet together in councils, they tended to group themselves according to the civil provinces. In the 3rd century there emerges clear evidence of the ecclesiastical province, usually coinciding in area with the civil province and accepting the bishop of the civil capital (metropolis) as its primate (metropolitan), a system which received canonical status and further precision at the Council of Nicaea (325). Besides such metropolitans, the bishops of a few outstanding sees acquired a special authority through a combination of the secular importance of the city and its place in missionary history as a mother church. In Egypt, for example, the bishop of Alexandria ruled six provinces, and in Latin Africa the bishop of Carthage was the accepted leader, though without juridical or canonical rights, of the whole area. The Council of Nicaea, while defining the canonical status of the provincial synods and metropolitans, reaffirmed the ancient customary privileges of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and certain other unnamed sees. Out of this the patriarchates of later times were developed.

Well, I don't know who the source is for that "information." I am very careful about what I accept as true or reject as untrue...

I certainly don't trust Wikipedia and such

 

[Orangecat]

So you think God loves you​

Nope.

 

[forkintheroad7]

Nope.

Nope to what?

 

[Orangecat]

Nope to what?

I don't think there is a god who personally cares about me or my well being.

 

[forkintheroad7]

So God loves everyone but despises their sin and won't let someone in egregious sin into Heaven.

It's such a total lie that "good deeds won't get you to Heaven" as some protestant pastors say. The Word says just the opposite, that we will be judged by what we DO.

One thing we must do is stop committing mortal sin.

Most people take sin lightly these days. But they don't realize that when they sin, they 86 God out of their souls...

a big thing since "no impure thing will enter Heaven"

some pastors are just big liars, or if they really believe their own BS, they are still big UN-truth tellers... which is the same thing in th end

 

[forkintheroad7]

I don't think there is a god who personally cares about me or my well being.

Well, Jesus cares and Jesus is God. And God has given us Jesus so God the Father cares.

However, most people stay away from the Church Christ founded... missing out on His supernatural Presence.. It's very sad...

 

[Orangecat]

Well, Jesus cares and Jesus is God. And God has given us Jesus so God the Father cares.

However, most people stay away from the Church Christ founded... missing out on His supernatural Presence.. It's very sad...

You can believe whatever you'd like. I hope you're correct.

 

[Woodznutz]

Well, I can assure you that God has a completely different notion on what LOVE is than you do. That's because I have learned a lot in my time on Planet E, plus I have read God's Word (over and over) and been in HIS Church (He founded only one).

If you think "love" is being given everything you want (in this life), you are delusional and headed for major disappointment and heartache--maybe even Hell. Jesus says in so many words that most people end up there! If you don't get what you want from Him asap, you will find yourself very angry with God, assuming that hasn't happened yet, and if you stay ticked until you die... Hell awaits.

We've all prayed for things that God never gave us.

My parents never gave me anything, at least once I left home. Then there are parents who give their little spoiled darlings "everything"--and wonder why they turn out to be hedonistic, narcissist sociopaths only concerned with Numero Uno.

So yeh... maybe it's time to discover how God loves.. and go with that option.

"God chastises every son he loves."

-somewhere in the Bible.

 

[Woodznutz]

Catholicism, the only one that can be traced back to the FIRST century.

Luther, Father of Protestantism, came along in the 16th century... a tad late, I'd say...

Peter and Paul preached in Rome and were killed there by the Romans. Then they retroactively used Peter as the founder of the Roman church seeking to legitimize it. Meanwhile the other disciples were trying to reach the scattered remnants of the northern kingdom, to whom Jesus was "sent only", who God had driven into the "north country", northwest Europe. In the meantime, Rome was hunting the true church down to eliminate it. However, God protected the church throughout the dark ages of the Roman church's rule, 1260 years to be exact, then brought it out of hiding in the Reformation period.

Note that Peter was the apostle to the Jews, Paul to the Gentiles. This left the other apostles to minister to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" to whom they were sent by Jesus. Most of them were also murdered by the Romans.

 

[Hafar1014]

Well, I can assure you that God has a completely different notion on what LOVE is than you do. That's because I have learned a lot in my time on Planet E, plus I have read God's Word (over and over) and been in HIS Church (He founded only one).

If you think "love" is being given everything you want (in this life), you are delusional and headed for major disappointment and heartache--maybe even Hell. Jesus says in so many words that most people end up there! If you don't get what you want from Him asap, you will find yourself very angry with God, assuming that hasn't happened yet, and if you stay ticked until you die... Hell awaits.

We've all prayed for things that God never gave us.

My parents never gave me anything, at least once I left home. Then there are parents who give their little spoiled darlings "everything"--and wonder why they turn out to be hedonistic, narcissist sociopaths only concerned with Numero Uno.

So yeh... maybe it's time to discover how God loves.. and go with that option.

The message of Genesis is God empowers you to solve your own problems. God gave you free will morals and a mind use it. Stop complaining life is tough man up

 

[onefour1]

Catholic Church Apostasy Reasons​

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) teaches that the Great Apostasy began shortly after the ascension of Jesus Christ and continued until the restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith in 1820. According to LDS doctrine, the Catholic Church is viewed as a central part of this apostasy, particularly due to its perceived departure from the original teachings and authority established by Christ and his apostles. The LDS Church identifies several key reasons for the Catholic Church's state of apostasy, primarily based on doctrinal corruption, the loss of priesthood authority, and the incorporation of pagan practices.

• Loss of Priesthood Authority: The LDS Church believes that all priesthood leaders with authority to conduct and perpetuate church affairs were either martyred, taken from the earth, or began to teach impure doctrines, causing a break in the necessary apostolic succession and the ability to receive revelation.
• Corruption of Christian Doctrine: The simple doctrines of the gospel of Christ were corrupted by admixture with pagan philosophies such as Neo-Platonism, Platonic realism, Aristotelianism, and Asceticism.
• Introduction of Pagan Practices: The Church in Rome is accused of incorporating pagan rituals, mysteries, festivals, and deities—such as Mithras and Sol Invictus—into Christian worship, including the adoption of pagan festivals and the use of pagan symbols.
• Institution of Idolatry: The Catholic Church is said to have promoted idolatry in seductive and pernicious forms, which the LDS Church views as a major departure from pure worship.
• Alteration of Essential Ordinances: The LDS Church claims that the Church of Rome altered the ordinance of baptism, destroying its symbolism and associating it with pagan rites, and corrupted the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper through the doctrine of transubstantiation.
• Promotion of Unscriptural Doctrines: The doctrine of supererogation, which claims that the merits of the righteous can be applied to the forgiveness of sinners, is considered an unscriptural and repellent dogma.
• Enforcement of Celibacy: The imposition of an unnatural state of celibacy upon the clergy is seen as a departure from the divine plan, which values marriage as a sacred institution.
• Suppression of Scripture: The Church is accused of penalizing the study of the Holy Scriptures by the general populace, thereby limiting access to divine truth.
• Adulteration of Gospel Principles: The LDS Church teaches that the Church became a spectacle of ornate display, fabricated by the caprice of man, and that its doctrines were adulterated with the theories and sophistries of men, producing a creed rank with superstition and heresy.
• Denial of the Holy Ghost and False Doctrines: The LDS Church identifies the Catholic Church as a source of false, vain, and foolish doctrines, and as a place where the Holy Ghost is denied, contributing to its state of apostasy.

see
Dialogue Journal
Profile of Apostasy: Who Are the Bad Guys, Really? - Dialogue Journal


The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Chapter 40: The Long Night of Apostasy

For an in depth study of the subject see

The Great Apostasy (James Talmage collection): Talmage, James E., Hunt, Bryan A., Alexander, A. J.: 9781519762160: Amazon.com: Books

 

[frigidweirdo]

I don't have to prove anything.

We have the internet, we have books... we have Jesus telling us Seek and you will find..

so go with that

Right.... you just make a claim and then no conversation because you don't have to prove anything.

Great. See you later.