What is the one true Church?

[Illuminator]

And it gets more involved than that.
The Greek word can be translated in the English language accurately as overseer.....It is an English word, do you see it. The position of overseer came to be Called Bishop in the Middle Ages....which is fine.....but you cannot say they new that term or position in the early church because if you said all these Catholic terms to them they would look at you like you had three heads......those words were not in the Greek language nor understood by the people of the time period. And this whole effort to do this is to deceive people into thinking that the Catholic Church existed before 321 AD.

TRANSLATION:
ANY Greek word can be translated in the English language accurately according to my private dictionary. ALL the lexicons, concordances and dictionaries in the world are ALL WRONG except mine!!!

 

[Grailhunter]

Constantine legalized Christianity with the Edict of Milan
Christians were legally permitted to practice their religion alongside all of the other pagan religious approved by the state.

Yes freedom of religion....as it is in America.

Edict Milan in 312 AD stopped the persecutions and made Christianity "legal"
Then Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire when Emperor Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380,

From there, there was always a strong connection between the Catholic Church and the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman empire and the Empires and kingdoms that followed.

Years ago I was looking into how many Ecumenical Councils the various Emperors had attended and or a had a vested interest in, I think it was ten. Of the seven councils recognized by Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Protestants as ecumenical, all were called by a Roman emperor. The emperor gave them legal status within the entire Roman Empire and physically enforce their rulings if necessary.

 

[Grailhunter]

whether there was ONE issue ot ten thousand issues is irrelevant.
They were ONE Body prior to the East-West schicm in the 11th century.

Nope.

 

[Grailhunter]

No - just the word.
The office has been around since Peter.

That would be seriously incorrect!

 

[Brakelite]

LOL Ya I know there are Catholics that do not like the Roman connection, but I assure you it was all about Rome to begin with. Emperor Constantine built Christians a city called Byzantium. And any physical enforcement of any Christian ruling was done by the empire.

The vain attempts to distance themselves from the Roman connection are merely an attempt to deny their true roots. The 4th beast of Daniel 7 is pagan Rome. The little horn that grew from that beast is papal Rome. The Papacy is and always was Roman, despite pretensions to the contrary.

 

[Grailhunter]

ANY Greek word can be translated in the English language accurately according to my private dictionary

How can you guys comment on transition of languages when you cannot even read a sentence.
I did not say that Greek cannot be translated into English, but it could not be translated into English until the English language existed and that was the Middle Ages. Now after the English language existed then you can translate other languages into English. Then you cannot take English or modern words and insert them into earlier time periods because the people did not know of or use English back then. This is pretty simple stuff....use both hands....try to get your head around it.

 

[Illuminator]

Offices in the Bible are not determined by TITLES, they are determined by FUNCTION.
Let's look at the FUNCTION of "the man of God" in 2 Tim. 3:16.

"All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16-17)

There is the relationship: the Scriptures are a tool for "teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness," but who is to use this tool for these purposes? That is, who has the authority to teach, reproof, correct, and train others in righteousness? The "man of God" has this authority.
But, who is the "man of God?" You may wish to claim this title for yourself as well, but a short survey of Scripture's use of the title will reveal that this, too, is a privileged title that cannot be simply taken upon oneself:

Moses - "This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death." (Deut. 33:1)

"Then the people of Judah came to Joshua at Gilgal; and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said to him, 'You know what the LORD said to Moses the man of God in Kadesh-barnea concerning you and me.'" (Josh. 14:6)

The Angel of the Lord - "Then the woman came and told her husband, 'A man of God came to me, and his countenance was like the countenance of the angel of God, very terrible; I did not ask him whence he was, and he did not tell me his name...' Then Manoah entreated the LORD, and said, 'O, LORD, I pray thee, let the man of God whom thou didst send come again to us, and teach us what we are to do with the boy that will be born.'" (Jud. 13:6, 8)

Samuel - "The servant answered Saul again, 'Here, I have with me the fourth part of a shekel of silver, and I will give it to the man of God, to tell us our way.'" (1 Sam. 9:8)

Elijah - "And she said to Elijah, 'What have you against me, O man of God? You have come to me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to cause the death of my son!'" (1 Kings 17:18)

Elisha - "And she went up and laid him on the bed of the man of God, and shut the door upon him, and went out... When Elisha came into the house, he saw the child lying dead on his bed." (2 Kings 4:21, 32)

David - "According to the ordinance of David his father, he appointed the divisions of the priests for their service, and the Levites for their offices of praise and ministry before the priests as the duty of each day required, and the gatekeepers in their divisions for the several gates; for so David the man of God had commanded." (2 Chr. 8:14)

St. Timothy - "But as for you, man of God, shun all this; aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness." (1 Tim. 6:11)

Contrary to the opinion that the "man of God" can be any Christian without distinction, Scripture itself will not allow such an interpretation, insisting that the "man of God" is a figure of authority,

• either commissioned by God directly through Divine Intervention (such as Moses or the Angel), or
• appointed by another holder of authority (such as Samuel, David, Elisha, and St. Timothy).

From this very brief survey of the phrase "man of God" (there are perhaps a dozen or so more passages, relating to the characters listed above - I have chosen representative verses), we see that what holds true for "pastors" holds true for the "man of God": it is a title of authority that can in no way be taken upon oneself, but rather, it is bestowed upon a man by a higher authority. A man must be called by God to hold this title of "man of God."

But there is another objection here: you will say, "I have been called by God to be a pastor." Very well, let us take another look at Scripture to measure your claim. or:
"I have been called by God to be a Grailhunter because Miriam appeared to me."
Biblically, there is only one way to become a legitimate ambassador of Christ, or "pastor": by appointment from a superior. This can be done in two ways:

1. being commissioned by a legitimate ambassador (apostolic succession), or
2. being called directly by God.

We saw examples of this in Scripture already:

1. Ss. Timothy and Titus were appointed to their positions of authority by succession,
2. Moses was appointed to his position directly by God, with no human mediation.

As to the first method, apostolic succession comes through the laying on of hands in ceremony: "Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands... guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us." (2 Tim. 1:6, 14)

When St. Paul imposed his hands on St. Timothy, he passed on a legitimate apostolic authority, "entrusted" the "truth" to him, and imparted the gift of "the Holy Spirit" for the safekeeping and preservation of the Gospel.

As has already been said, only a superior can do this, and not an inferior,
since an inferior cannot pass on what he does not already possess.

Now, the majority of Protestant pastors reject entirely the notion of apostolic succession (although it has now been shown, from Scripture, that apostolic succession is the ordinary means of transmitting apostolic authority and the Gospel message), and so only one option remains for the Protestant pastor and/or Grailhunter: to claim to have been appointed directly by God, as Moses was (that is, by extraordinary means).

To those who would make such a claim, I issue this warning: you had better be sure of your claim. Scripture does not speak well of those who illegitimately take this position upon themselves. In the book of Acts, illegitimate leaders attempted to confuse the Christians by claiming that circumcision was necessary for salvation. The Council of Jerusalem commented upon this, saying:

"...we have heard that some persons from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions..." (Acts 15:24)
Note well what is presumed here: that it was wrong of these men to act in such a way without first having received their commission, their "instructions," from those in legitimate authority.

Further, when King Jereboam began to rule the northern tribes of Israel, it is noted that his sin was not dividing the kingdom, but dividing the Old Testament "church" by setting up alternative places of worship, and illegitimately appointing pastors:

"And this thing became a sin, for the people went to the one at Bethel and to the other as far as Dan. He also made houses on high places, and appointed priests from among all the people, who were not of the Levites." (1 Kings 12:30-31).

That being said, let us examine the claim of the Protestant pastor who purports to have been called extraordinarily by God. We will look at three examples of men (or groups of men) in Scripture who were truly called by God directly to their ministry: Moses, the Apostles, and Jesus Christ.

Scripture teaches that this supernatural, extraordinary calling by God directly is the exception, not the rule. The rule is appointment by succession (as in the case of the kings, prophets, and the second generation of apostles). In the exceptional, extraordinary case, Scripture requires the proof of miracles, signs, and wonders for authenticity:

continued...

 

[Illuminator]

Moses - "Then Moses answered, "But behold, they will not believe me or listen to my voice, for they will say, 'The LORD did not appear to you.'" The LORD said to him, "What is that in your hand?" He said, "A rod." And he said, "Cast it on the ground." So he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from it. But the LORD said to Moses, "Put out your hand, and take it by the tail" -- so he put out his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand -- "that they may believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you." Again, the LORD said to him, "Put your hand into your bosom." And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, as white as snow. Then God said, "Put your hand back into your bosom." So he put his hand back into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, it was restored like the rest of his flesh. "If they will not believe you," God said, "or heed the first sign, they may believe the latter sign. If they will not believe even these two signs or heed your voice, you shall take some water from the Nile and pour it upon the dry ground; and the water which you shall take from the Nile will become blood upon the dry ground." (Ex.4:1-9)

"...the LORD said to Moses, "I am the LORD; tell Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I say to you." But Moses said to the LORD, "Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips; how then shall Pharaoh listen to me?" And the LORD said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh; and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet... You shall speak all that I command you; and Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt..." (Ex. 6:29-7:3)

The Apostles - "...how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will." (Heb. 2:3-4)

"Now Peter and John were going up to the temple at the hour of prayer, the ninth hour. And a man lame from birth was being carried, whom they laid daily at that gate of the temple which is called Beautiful to ask alms of those who entered the temple. Seeing Peter and John about to go into the temple, he asked for alms. And Peter directed his gaze at him, with John, and said, "Look at us." And he fixed his attention upon them, expecting to receive something from them. But Peter said, "I have no silver and gold, but I give you what I have; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk." And he took him by the right hand and raised him up; and immediately his feet and ankles were made strong. And leaping up he stood and walked and entered the temple with them, walking and leaping and praising God. And all the people saw him walking and praising God." (Acts 3:1-9)

"And now, Lord, look upon their threats, and grant to thy servants to speak thy word with all boldness, while thou stretchest out thy hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of thy holy servant Jesus." (Acts 4:29-30)

"And Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people." (Acts 6:8)
In addition to the Apostles in general, there is the specific case of St. Paul, whose calling truly was extraordinary, in a way that the other apostles' calling was not. They were called by Jesus while he was still a man on the earth; St. Paul was called through a vision and a heavenly voice. Thus, we see in Scripture:
"And God did extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that handkerchiefs or aprons were carried away from his body to the sick, and diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them." (Acts 19:11-12)

His calling was extraordinary, and so, in keeping with this, he performed "extraordinary miracles." Finally, we come to our last example: Our Lord Himself. His was, of course, an extraordinary calling, He being sent on His mission to earth by God the Father directly. "Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. (John 14:10-12)

"If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true; there is another who bears witness to me, and I know that the testimony which he bears to me is true. You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. Not that the testimony which I receive is from man; but I say this that you may be saved. He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light. But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me witness that the Father has sent me." (John 5:31-36)

This last case should truly give pause to any professed follower of Christ who claims to have been called as a Shepherd of God's flock. Where are the miracles that must attend your ministry as verification of your extraordinary calling? If even Jesus submitted to this proof-test, how can any mere man exempt himself from this same test, unless he wishes to say he is greater than even Jesus?

Here, then, is the summary of what we find in Scripture: no man can take the responsibility or title of "pastor" to himself. Rather, he must be sent by God, either indirectly (via succession), or directly (via extraordinary calling). If he claims the latter, his mission must be accompanied by miracles, signs and wonders as proof of his Divine vocation. This is the crux of my challenge to you, if you are a Protestant pastor: by what authority do you claim your office? By succession? If so, demonstrate that you were called by a superior authority who himself had a legitimate claim to his office. By extraordinary calling? If so, then show the required signs and wonders that authenticate your ministry.

In conclusion, I say to you: you must be absolutely sure, for your own soul's sake, that your calling is legitimate. In Numbers 16, Korah set himself up as an illegitimate authority against God's appointed authorities, and was destroyed for his audacious act. This problem has not disappeared in our day, for we find St. Jude warning us of falling into the same sin:

"Woe to them! For they walk in the way of Cain, and abandon themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam's error, and perish in Korah's rebellion." (Jude 11)
You may choose to brush this challenge aside, but that will not absolve you of the account that you will have to give before God one day regarding these issues. I invite to ask yourself, honestly: have you set yourself up illegitimately against the legitimate authorities who can prove their mission by succession? Are you in danger of being destroyed for committing Korah's sin?

One side note, to those of you who read this who are not pastors: this same challenge applies secondarily to you. Are you certain that the man who shepherds your soul is a legitimate leader? Or are you following a self-appointed shepherd who is in rebellion against God's appointed authorities?

By What Authority - A Challenge to Protestant Pastors

 

[Grailhunter]

Moses - "Then Moses answered, "But behold, they will not believe me or listen to my voice, for they will say, 'The LORD did not appear to you.'" The LORD said to him, "What is that in your hand?" He said, "A rod." And he said, "Cast it on the ground." So he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from it. But the LORD said to Moses, "Put out your hand, and take it by the tail" -- so he put out his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand -- "that they may believe that the LORD, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you." Again, the LORD said to him, "Put your hand into your bosom." And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, as white as snow. Then God said, "Put your hand back into your bosom." So he put his hand back into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, it was restored like the rest of his flesh. "If they will not believe you," God said, "or heed the first sign, they may believe the latter sign. If they will not believe even these two signs or heed your voice, you shall take some water from the Nile and pour it upon the dry ground; and the water which you shall take from the Nile will become blood upon the dry ground." (Ex.4:1-9)

"...the LORD said to Moses, "I am the LORD; tell Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I say to you." But Moses said to the LORD, "Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips; how then shall Pharaoh listen to me?" And the LORD said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh; and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet... You shall speak all that I command you; and Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land. But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt..." (Ex. 6:29-7:3)

The Apostles - "...how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard him, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his own will." (Heb. 2:3-4)

"Now Peter and John were going up to the temple at the hour of prayer, the ninth hour. And a man lame from birth was being carried, whom they laid daily at that gate of the temple which is called Beautiful to ask alms of those who entered the temple. Seeing Peter and John about to go into the temple, he asked for alms. And Peter directed his gaze at him, with John, and said, "Look at us." And he fixed his attention upon them, expecting to receive something from them. But Peter said, "I have no silver and gold, but I give you what I have; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk." And he took him by the right hand and raised him up; and immediately his feet and ankles were made strong. And leaping up he stood and walked and entered the temple with them, walking and leaping and praising God. And all the people saw him walking and praising God." (Acts 3:1-9)

"And now, Lord, look upon their threats, and grant to thy servants to speak thy word with all boldness, while thou stretchest out thy hand to heal, and signs and wonders are performed through the name of thy holy servant Jesus." (Acts 4:29-30)

"And Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people." (Acts 6:8)
In addition to the Apostles in general, there is the specific case of St. Paul, whose calling truly was extraordinary, in a way that the other apostles' calling was not. They were called by Jesus while he was still a man on the earth; St. Paul was called through a vision and a heavenly voice. Thus, we see in Scripture:
"And God did extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that handkerchiefs or aprons were carried away from his body to the sick, and diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them." (Acts 19:11-12)

His calling was extraordinary, and so, in keeping with this, he performed "extraordinary miracles." Finally, we come to our last example: Our Lord Himself. His was, of course, an extraordinary calling, He being sent on His mission to earth by God the Father directly. "Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. (John 14:10-12)

"If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true; there is another who bears witness to me, and I know that the testimony which he bears to me is true. You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. Not that the testimony which I receive is from man; but I say this that you may be saved. He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light. But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me witness that the Father has sent me." (John 5:31-36)

This last case should truly give pause to any professed follower of Christ who claims to have been called as a Shepherd of God's flock. Where are the miracles that must attend your ministry as verification of your extraordinary calling? If even Jesus submitted to this proof-test, how can any mere man exempt himself from this same test, unless he wishes to say he is greater than even Jesus?

Here, then, is the summary of what we find in Scripture: no man can take the responsibility or title of "pastor" to himself. Rather, he must be sent by God, either indirectly (via succession), or directly (via extraordinary calling). If he claims the latter, his mission must be accompanied by miracles, signs and wonders as proof of his Divine vocation. This is the crux of my challenge to you, if you are a Protestant pastor: by what authority do you claim your office? By succession? If so, demonstrate that you were called by a superior authority who himself had a legitimate claim to his office. By extraordinary calling? If so, then show the required signs and wonders that authenticate your ministry.

In conclusion, I say to you: you must be absolutely sure, for your own soul's sake, that your calling is legitimate. In Numbers 16, Korah set himself up as an illegitimate authority against God's appointed authorities, and was destroyed for his audacious act. This problem has not disappeared in our day, for we find St. Jude warning us of falling into the same sin:

"Woe to them! For they walk in the way of Cain, and abandon themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam's error, and perish in Korah's rebellion." (Jude 11)
You may choose to brush this challenge aside, but that will not absolve you of the account that you will have to give before God one day regarding these issues. I invite to ask yourself, honestly: have you set yourself up illegitimately against the legitimate authorities who can prove their mission by succession? Are you in danger of being destroyed for committing Korah's sin?

One side note, to those of you who read this who are not pastors: this same challenge applies secondarily to you. Are you certain that the man who shepherds your soul is a legitimate leader? Or are you following a self-appointed shepherd who is in rebellion against God's appointed authorities?

By What Authority - A Challenge to Protestant Pastors

But look at the time and effort here....look at the focus in this tread. This is the root of the Catholic Church's problems. The desire for supremacy and power and control.....stemming from its connection to a man. For the Church it worked like a curse. Our connection is to Christ and Christ alone. Anything else is tantamount to idolatry.

So many ways the Catholic Church has served to be an example of what not to do.....but more importantly it gives us an example of what not to want. The Bible says the root of all evil is the love of money.....but a higher understand of the scriptures and history and reality is that the root of all evil is WANT! Be careful about what you want!

And any true calling comes from God and there is no human intermediator. How do you know that you have a true calling? The proof is in the pudding. What do you want? What do you do? What are the results of your efforts? Ever hear a guy say, I am the kind of man that.....
Well the facts are, you are what you do. You are what you want. Do you have a Christian spirit or are you a bundle of snarling bitterness?

 

[Brakelite]

Great Controversy errors​

Samuele Bacchiocchi, a former professor at Andrews University, described himself as a "committed Adventist" with a "deep respect" for Ellen White's writings. Nevertheless, he broke ranks with traditional SDA thinking by proposing a different interpretation of the 1260-day prophecy. In so doing, he has exposed a number of errors in Great Controversy.

Great Controversy Errors

Errors found by Samuele Bacchiocchi in Ellen White's Great Controversy

nonsda.org

I happen to disagree with him. Regardless of his Jesuit Georgetown theological honors.

History happens to are with the prophecies of scripture concerning the Catholic Church.
KJV Daniel 7:24-25
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

KJV John 16:2-3
2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.
3 And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.

KJV Revelation 13:6-7
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

KJV Revelation 17:6
6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.


KJV Revelation 18:24
24 And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.

 

[Brakelite]

If he claims the latter, his mission must be accompanied by miracles, signs and wonders as proof of his Divine vocation

That is inherently dangerous, trusting in miracles as a sign of a valid ministry.

KJV Revelation 13:12-14
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

KJV Matthew 7:22-23
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[Brakelite]

The literal translation of Episkopos means "Over-Watcher" - epi- "over" (see epi-) + skopos "one that watches".

So I am no expert in language, Greek is Greek to me. But the above quote is quite bemusing to me being presented as it is to nullify the word over-seer. Overwatcher... Overseer... Watch... See... Am I the only one who can see the connection? Or am I the only one watching?

 

[Brakelite]

Yes freedom of religion....as it is in America.

Edict Milan in 312 AD stopped the persecutions and made Christianity "legal"
Then Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire when Emperor Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380,

From there, there was always a strong connection between the Catholic Church and the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman empire and the Empires and kingdoms that followed.

Years ago I was looking into how many Ecumenical Councils the various Emperors had attended and or a had a vested interest in, I think it was ten. Of the seven councils recognized by Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Protestants as ecumenical, all were called by a Roman emperor. The emperor gave them legal status within the entire Roman Empire and physically enforce their rulings if necessary.

One could add that not only did Constantine make Christianity legal, but he and his antecedents, particularly Justinian, made every version of Christianity illegal that didn't submit to the Roman version of Christianity. Beginning with the Aryans. Later the Celts. The Albigenses. Waldenses. Protestants....

 

[Grailhunter]

One could add that not only did Constantine make Christianity legal, but he and his antecedents, particularly Justinian, made every version of Christianity illegal that didn't submit to the Roman version of Christianity. Beginning with the Aryans. Later the Celts. The Albigenses. Waldenses. Protestants....

Piecing together the history of the early Catholic Church is not easy. Determining the whats and whys is more difficult.
What was the situation just a short time before Emperor Constantine and the Edict of Milan is something I have researched.
The Christian persecutions as far as severities occurred in waves over a 247 year period and just before the battle of the Milvian Bridge the persecutions were very severe. At that point the Roman intent was to eliminate Christianity. There is no consensus as to how many Christians were left.

Why did the Romans hate the Christians so much? The Roman perspective would seem kind of odd to Christians. They saw Christianity as a threat. The way we look at cults today is how they perceived Christianity back then. And there are a number of reasons for that.

Then you had Gnosticism, which was on the rise. The Gnostics had always been secretive but as time went on they had perfected their secretive nature. You do not hear to much about Gnostic persecution by the Romans. The popularity of Gnosticism was on the rise, even within what we would call "mainstream" Christianity. What it looked like was that mainstream Christianity was on its way out. This was understood at the time and was definitely on the minds of the Christian leaders. The belief of keeping the faith whole was fading away and they were really powerless to do anything about it.

Then Constantine won the battle at the Milvian Bridge and things started to change drastically. He did not wait any time, the Christian persecutions suddenly stopped, even before the Edict of Milan. That sent a message to all Christians....that he was serious. The story of Constantine and his mother is quite lengthy. This concept of one faith was something that he understood and being a Roman, how to get this done was definite in his wheelhouse. He opened communications with the Christian congregations (churches) and planned a meeting all expenses paid and accommodations arranged at Nicaea. Christianity sighed a breath of relief and the Christian leaders met at Nicaea. Constantine's intent was to organize and back Christianity and he moved quickly to make it clear that was what he intended to do. Christianity as one faith was his intent. And when the Roman Catholic Church was formed this became their initiative. And the rest is history.

Now as we look back on it, some see that as a bad thing. But would Christianity have survived if that would not have happened? Would Gnosticism have overrun mainstream Christianity? Of course the answer to these questions we do not know for sure. Some people look back and criticize the Pagan aspects of merging with the Roman Empire. Even Catholics want to distance the Catholic Church from Constantine and the Roman Empire ....they do not like the name Roman Catholic Church. But a lot of this is because they do not understand what was going on at the time.

Nearly all of Christianity was made up of Pagan converts to Christianity or descendants of Pagan converts to Christianity.....Christians and Christian leaders a like. Back then they were Gentile-Christians and today we are Gentile-Christians. So before Constantine and the Edict of Milan all or nearly all Christians were Gentile-Christians coming from different regions and bringing in a lot of Pagan traditions and cultures. They had converted their religion but they had not abandoned all of their regional traditions. They were no longer worshipping Pagan gods but they still had their traditions and seasonal holidays, which eventually were Christianized. This was already set long before Constantine and the merger with the Roman Empire, Constantine and the Ecumenical Councils just organized it.

The concern with the Pagan aspects of Christianity is really a concern with all of Christianity at that time....because it was the norm. I have addressed this several times on the forum here.....what would it take, to take the Pagan aspects out of Christianity and get back to strictly Bible only.....it is not pretty....and when you get down to the brass tacks of it, most Christians would not like it. Get Paganism out of Christianity and live strictly according to the Bible! It sounds good.....until you try to actually do it.

Christian women living at a second rate status......arranged marriages....the New Testament never put a moratorium on arranged marriages. It never put a moratorium on polygamy and concubinage. Even Martin Luther acknowledged this. Slavery was not denounced by Christ and the Apostles and Christianity did not put an end to it. You would have to do away with wedding ceremonies and receptions because most definitely they come from Pagan traditions with Pagan rituals imbedded in them. Of course the holidays are gone. So the outcome of all that would not be pretty. The New Testament spoke against the wisdom of men....most Christian do not realize they were referring to Greco-Roman philosophies. So Christianity developed a negative view of education and the sciences and it leaders were preferably not educated, that did not workout well. Some of this persists today.

I do not believe the Catholic Church owes any apologies for merging with the Roman Empire. But then you look back at how the Catholic Church turned out. Did Christ intend for that to happen? Was it part of the plan? Hard to say. Was the Protestant reform a reset for Christianity? Was it part of the plan? The reforms of the Catholic Church? Was that part of the plan? Again, hard to say. But the bottom line is, it is what it is. One faith will never happen. What is the best course from here?

I say Christians should stop hating each other and find some common ground, so as to have a united front against evil. Because evil is at our door. Where do we go from here? The Christian spirit should guide us....the Holy Spirit should guide us.

 

[Brakelite]

The vain attempts to distance themselves from the Roman connection are merely an attempt to deny their true roots. The 4th beast of Daniel 7 is pagan Rome. The little horn that grew from that beast is papal Rome. The Papacy is and always was Roman, despite pretensions to the contrary.

Further to that, most of you may be familiar with Daniel 2... The statue that Nebuchadnezzar dreamed? Gold head. Silver arms. Bronze torso. Legs of iron. Feet of iron and clay. But remember that Daniel told the king that the statue represented only 4 empires. The first was Babylon. The second Meda-Persia. The third Greece. And the fourth, Rome. Now notice, that the iron of Rome continues all the way down to the toes where it is destroyed by the Rock out without hands... That Rock is Christ at His coming, when He destroys all the nations until they are no more. Although the final state is a mixture of iron and clay, it has obviously changed it's form in some manner, it is still Rome. Only, solely, every bit Rome. The only logical biblical and historical understanding one can view this is that papal Rome answers to that part of the prophecy.

 

[Behold]

The CC, which is the "Cult of Mary", as designated so, in about 5AD.

Look how far they've come.
-
-

Feast Days of Mary​

January 1	—	Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God *
January 8	—	Our Lady of Prompt Succor
February 2	—	Presentation of the Lord
February 11	—	Our Lady of Lourdes
March 25	—	Annunciation
May 13	—	Our Lady of Fatima
May 31	—	Visitation
June 27	—	Our Mother of Perpetual Help
July 16	—	Our Lady of Mount Carmel
August 15	—	Assumption *
August 22	—	Queenship of Mary
September 8	—	Birth of Mary
September 12	—	The Most Holy Name of Mary
September 15	—	Our Lady of Sorrows
October 7	—	Our Lady of the Rosary
November 21	—	Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
December 8	—	Immaculate Conception *
December 12	—	Our Lady of Guadalupe

* Holy day of Obligation



The Month of Mary is May.
The Month of the Rosary is October.
The Feast of the Immaculate Heart is the Saturday following the Second Sunday after Pentecost.
The First Saturday of each Month is also dedicated to Marian Devotions.

And, here is the largest known Mary.
She's a big girl.
-

• 

Reactions:face2face
Quote Reply
Report Edit Delete

 

[Augustin56]

But look at the time and effort here....look at the focus in this tread. This is the root of the Catholic Church's problems. The desire for supremacy and power and control.....stemming from its connection to a man. For the Church it worked like a curse. Our connection is to Christ and Christ alone. Anything else is tantamount to idolatry.

The Catholic Church is about authority and responsibility, not power. The difference between authority and power is that authority is given; power is taken. Christ gave His authority to His Church, the Catholic Church, to teach, preach, and sanctify. Protestantism took power upon themselves to try to replace Christ's Church, which according to St. Paul is His Body, and therefore, logically, Christ Himself. Those who follow Christ can do so in one of two general ways. They can follow Him according to His way, or they can follow them according to their own way. Protestantism chooses the latter. Catholicism, being the first by a wide margin, follows the former. Protestantism's connection to Christ is solely by their own viewpoint, rather than Christ's. They make up their own doctrines through personal interpretation of Scripture, which Scripture nixes in 2 Peter 1:20-21. The two pillars of Protestantism, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide are entirely non-bibilcal, man-made doctrines. And the result of this? Continual splintering into more and more and more man-made, different-believing denominations. That cannot be the foundation of the fullness of truth that Christ gave mankind!

 

[Illuminator]

The early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes,

“Where in practice was the apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it”​

(Early Christian Doctrines, 37).

For the early Fathers, “the identity of the oral tradition with the original revelation is guaranteed by the unbroken succession of bishops in the great sees going back lineally to the apostles. . . . [A]n additional safeguard is supplied by the Holy Spirit, for the message committed was to the Church, and the Church is the home of the Spirit. Indeed, the Church’s bishops are . . . Spirit-endowed men who have been vouchsafed ‘an infallible charism of truth’” (ibid.).​

​

Here are examples of what early Christian writers had to say on the subject of apostolic succession:

Pope Clement I (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).

Hegesippus (Memoirs, cited in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4:22 [A.D. 180]).​

Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189]).​

Tertullian (Demurrer Against the Heretics 20 [A.D. 200]).​

Cyprian of Carthage (Letters 69[75]:3 [A.D. 253]).​

Augustine (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” 4:5 [A.D. 397]).​

What the Early Church Believed: Apostolic Succession

How did the early Christians determine which was the true Church? The test was simple: Just trace the apostolic succession of the claimants.

www.catholic.com

 

[Pearl]

The Catholic Church is about authority and responsibility, not power. The difference between authority and power is that authority is given; power is taken. Christ gave His authority to His Church, the Catholic Church, to teach, preach, and sanctify. Protestantism took power upon themselves to try to replace Christ's Church, which according to St. Paul is His Body, and therefore, logically, Christ Himself. Those who follow Christ can do so in one of two general ways. They can follow Him according to His way, or they can follow them according to their own way. Protestantism chooses the latter. Catholicism, being the first by a wide margin, follows the former. Protestantism's connection to Christ is solely by their own viewpoint, rather than Christ's. They make up their own doctrines through personal interpretation of Scripture, which Scripture nixes in 2 Peter 1:20-21. The two pillars of Protestantism, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide are entirely non-bibilcal, man-made doctrines. And the result of this? Continual splintering into more and more and more man-made, different-believing denominations. That cannot be the foundation of the fullness of truth that Christ gave mankind!

So do you believe the Catholic Church is the only one that counts?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Nope.

And what is your documented evidence for this?

There isn’t a SINGLE reputable Protestant scholar who agrees with you.