The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. - Religion - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. (9374 Views)
Catholic Church Reacts To Father Mbaka's Controversial Political Statement / Why Did The Catholic Church Decide That Priests Should Be Celibate? / Aloysius Ikegwuonwu Bishop Reacts To Ozubulu Catholic Church Killings (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (Reply) (Go Down)
| The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 4:39pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
I have often watched with dismay the nauseating lies of this church masquerading itself as the One True Church or the first church that ever existed, which Jesus built (Matthew 16:18). So today, I want us to set the records straight! Let us embark on this journey of untraveled corridors of history. Just relax, enjoy and watch as the true history unfold... NOTE: This work is an except from: WHERE IS THE THE TRUE CHURCH? AND ITS INCREDIBLE HISTORY! By David C. Pack *Here, we will called this church 'THE COUNTERFEIT MOVEMENT' In view of the miraculous signs and wonders performed during the apostolic era of the Church, we could ask, why would anyone want to infiltrate, subvert and deceive such believers? The Jewish religious establishment, who feared and resisted the emerging young Church, used threats and brute force to achieve their end. So did the Romans, although they were initially more tolerant, but later more brutal. Only the instruments of Satan would use such insidious tactics to infiltrate and undermine. Perhaps most of these initial agents understood who and what the Church was. Others, however, were more likely unwitting tools of Satan, following the impulses of the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2). Now, lets chart the development of that subtle counterfeit movement. Simon Magus The first and perhaps most influential—and ultimately the most destructive—false teacher that we will study in relation to this false movement is Simon Magus. The word magus means sorcerer or magician. Simon the “Sorcerer” is considered by all who are familiar with this aspect of history to be the founder of the first-century heretical movement away from the truth of God. Ironically, many who branded him for his heretical practices were actually writers and historians who unwittingly followed his movement. Among them were Justin Martyr, Jerome, and various other writers of the second and following centuries, whom we will cite in discussing this subject. To say that this Simon was the true founder of the Roman Catholic Church would be correct, but not complete. He died in AD 68. It took nearly three centuries for the system he introduced to amass the power and to evolve through all the stages of modifying and counterfeiting doctrine to come to be known as the Roman Catholic Church. The architect of the movement is not any man or men, but rather the “god of this world” (II Cor. 4:4)—Satan. The account of Simon is picked up in Acts 8:9-10. Here is Luke’s description of this man: “But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: to whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.” Simon was baptized with other Samaritans, being captivated by the miracles and signs Philip performed (vs. 13). Then, after the apostles arrived from Jerusalem, Simon offered Peter and John money for the power to lay hands on people and transmit to them the Holy Spirit (vs. 18-19). To this offer, Peter replied, “Your money perish with you, because you have thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. You have neither part nor lot in this matter: for your heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this your wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of your heart may be forgiven you. For I perceive that you are in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity” (vs. 20-23). Remember that the Samaritans had been placed in the land from which the northern Kingdom of Israel had been taken captive by the Assyrians (2 Kings 17:24-40). These Samaritans had been brought from Babylon and continued to practice their ancient Babylonian religion, mixed with other religions. In particular, they picked up many of the terms from Judaism and Greek philosophy. Josephus, throughout book II of his Wars of the Jews, illustrated how the Samaritans schemed to undermine the Jews at every opportunity—during both periods of Greek and Roman domination. From the time Judah returned to the area of Jerusalem after captivity, the Samaritans plotted to halt the rebuilding of the temple as well as the rebuilding of the wall around Jerusalem (Ezra 4-5; Neh. 4, 6). They were well established as Satan’s instruments in opposing any phase of God’s Work. To be continued... 3 Likes 3 Shares |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 4:58pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Gnosticism Appears Simon, the high priest of the Babylonian Samaritan religion, was especially attracted to the philosophy of Gnosticism. As with many schools of philosophy, Gnosticism held that reality could never be understood by those uninitiated in philosophical reasoning. That approach was readily transferred to the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures that the Jews and original Christians embraced. To the Gnostics, all the recorded events of the Bible were supposedly metaphors and allegories never to be taken literally. They required interpretation by qualified scholars well versed in the Gnostic school of thought. Gnosticism proved to be the best weapon in Simon’s arsenal of tricks, more convincing than the demoniac sorcery and magic that worked so well on his fellow Samaritans. (We will come to appreciate that those who followed the use of metaphors and allegories in the 1990s were going back to a false “faith once delivered”—by the Gnostics.) Thus, we have such accounts as these by Edward Gibbon concerning the Gnostics: “The Mosaic account of the creation and fall of man was treated with profane derision by the Gnostics…The God of Israel was impiously represented by the Gnostics as a being liable to passion and to error…” As to the techniques employed by the Gnostics, Gibbon explains: “Acknowledging that the literal sense is repugnant to every principle of faith as well as reason, they deem themselves secure and invulnerable behind the ample veil of allegory, which they carefully spread over every tender part of the Mosaic dispensation.” Gibbon continued: “The Gnostics were distinguished as the most polite, the most learned, and the most wealthy of the Christian name; and that general appellation, which expressed a superiority of knowledge…assumed by their own pride…The Gnostics blended with the faith of Christ many sublime but obscure tenets, which they derived from oriental philosophy…” (Decline and Fall, ch. 15, pp. 150-151). The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 25, states, in its article titled “Simon Magus,” that he identified with the “Hellenized Gnosticism of Samaria.” The article referred to him as the “Samaritan Messiah” and the “father of all heresy.” As the apostolic Church was beginning to expand into new territories, so was Simon’s work also set to expand after AD 33, when he was “baptized” and pretended to be a Christian. As Satan’s agent in inaugurating the counterfeit religion, Simon carried his message from city to city, just as Christ’s apostles spread the true gospel. He translated the doctrine of grace as license to disobey God’s law. So in the formative decades of the true Church, we have, growing alongside it, this counterfeit movement. By the AD 50s and beyond, the writers of the New Testament would have to occasionally address this issue. Remember that Revelation 2:2 gave this message to the Ephesus Era to their credit: “I know your works, and your labor, and your patience, and how you can not bear them which are evil: and you have tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and have found them liars.” There were many claiming to be apostles (as did Simon) who were impostors and liars. The brethren of the Ephesus Era were able to discern as much. Some of the warnings about these false apostles are apparent in the following scriptures: II Thessalonians 2:7: “For the mystery of iniquity does already work...” II Corinthians 11:13-15: “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” I John 4:1: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” Jude 3: “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful…to write…and exhort you that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Continued... 3 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by StupidYorubaFool: 4:59pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Waste of my precious mb loadin this mumbo jumbo and loads of hogwash... By the way O.P you must be daft if you think I read all those thrash you stated up there. 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 5:28pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
continuation... Before Simon Magus went to Rome, around AD 42, Peter was sent to Antioch to counteract his false preaching. Paul indicates that Peter was in Antioch at that time (Gal. 2:11). From Antioch, Simon Magus soon went to Rome. Eusebius writes, “…the enemy of salvation [Satan] devising some scheme of seizing upon the imperial city (Rome) for himself brought thither Simon, whom we mentioned before. Coming to the aid of his insidious artifices, he attached many of the inhabitants of Rome to himself in order to deceive them” (The Ecclesiastical History, bk. 2, ch. 13, sec. 1). Simon’s constant companion, while delivering his message, was his mistress, Helen. Justin Martyr writes of her: “A certain Helen, also, is of this class, who had before been a public prostitute in Tyre of Phoenicia, and at that time attached herself to Simon, and was called, the first idea that proceeded from him.” Eusebius also references the second century writer Irenaeus about this relationship: “they [those deceived by Simon]…falling down before the pictures and statues of this selfsame Simon and the aforesaid Helen with him, venturing to offer them worship by incense, sacrifices, and libations…they [Simon and Helen] happen in truth to be so full of amazement, folly, and madness…on account of their excessive baseness and obscenity” (ibid., sec. 6, 7). Starting with a large population of his fellow Samaritans already in Rome, Simon managed to attract a significant following. Here, many people honored him as a god and erected a statue of him on the Tiber River. In Rome, much of Simon’s success could be attributed to his magic demonstrations, such as demon-powered levitation (ibid., sec. 3). It was these demonstrations that later earned him several audiences with Nero, in the AD 60s. Recall that Peter’s commission was to the lost tribes of Israel. In neither his nor Paul’s letters is there any indication that Peter was ever in Rome. The Catholics have always claimed that not only was Peter the first Roman bishop, but that he was also martyred in Rome. Even if he was brought there for execution, the fact remains that Peter never served there. The false claim that the apostle Peter was the first pope was appropriately labeled “Fiction pure and simple” by the author of the well-known Halley’s Bible Handbook, page 768. The person of great “distinction” who bore the title of Peter at Rome was, in fact, Simon Magus. The title of “Peter” or “Pater” or “Patre” was a title of religious primacy that Simon Magus donned. Thus, he carried the title Simon “Peter.” The word “Pater” is of the same derivation as the word “Papa” or “Father” or “Pope.” Now notice Christ’s direct command pertaining to such titles in Matthew 23:9: “And call no man your father upon the earth: for One is your Father, which is in heaven.” This verse forbids the use of “Father” as a religious title, as was done by the Babylonian Mystery Religion. Of course, this command does not relate to one’s father in the sense of being a parent. The individual responsible for designating Peter as the first Pope was Hegesippus, an apostate from the true Church. He must have known that Peter, a married man (Matt. 8:14; I Cor. 9:5), was not a celibate priest and was the antithesis of what the pope represented. Hegesippus “…originally drew up the list of Roman bishops, on which Anicetus and his successors—down to the Pope today—based their claim to be the successors of a Peter” (the title claimed by Simon Magus) (ACBCC, lesson 49, p. 15). Jude 4 summarizes the work of Simon and his followers, and is to the point: “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.” Next, we will see other key players of this counterfeit movement. Stay tuned... 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Scholar8200(m): 5:42pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
So Simon never truly repented! 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 5:54pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Scholar8200: Apparently, he never did bro. He was really "in the bond of iniquity" like apostle Peter perceived. |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Scholar8200(m): 5:57pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Splinz:he did not heed Peter's admonition. Apparently, for those deep in the occult, after they have believed, there might exist the need for deliverance especially for those who had gone deep therein. I believe his pride provided a stronghold and he was a willing tool. 2 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 6:10pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Other Key Players of the Counterfeit Movement Eusebius referenced Irenaeus, who had written about Simon Magus’ immediate successor. Known as Menander, he “…exhibited himself in his conduct an instrument of diabolical wickedness, not inferior to the former…He said that he was in truth the Savior sent from the invisible worlds for the salvation of men...Those who were deemed worthy would obtain perpetual immortality in this very life” (The Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius; bk. 3, ch. 26). This teaching of the immortal soul was an integral part of the Babylonian Mystery Religion carried over into the counterfeit movement. Nicholas of Antioch is identified in Hastings Dictionary of the Bible with Nicholas of Samaria, a heretic of Simon Magus’ company. Unrestrained indulgence and promiscuity were the hallmarks of the Nicolaitanes. Christ mentioned them as He commended the Ephesus Era for sharing His attitude toward their evil actions. Notice: “But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate” (Rev. 2:6). Another of Simon’s successors was an influential heretic by the name of Cerinthus. This false teacher had confronted the apostle John in the AD 90s. Of Cerinthus, we find, “The Bible does not name Cerinthus, but concerns John expressed in his three epistles refer, without a doubt, to this man’s teachings and influence” (The History of the Church of God, part 2, Kelly). One particular comment recorded by Eusebius, quoting John, well illustrates the true Church’s reception of Cerinthus. The setting involved John and Polycarp entering a public bathhouse at Ephesus, until they saw Cerinthus inside. As they immediately hastened outside, John was recorded to have said, “Let us flee lest the bath should fall in, as long as Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within” (Ecc. History, bk. 4, ch. 14, sec. 6). Another leader of this heretical movement was Marcion, a contemporary of Polycarp. Irenaeus recorded that when Marcion approached Polycarp (a disciple trained by apostle John to lead God's true Church after his demise) with the words, “‘Recognize us’…Polycarp displayed the same uncompromising attitude which his master John had shown towards Cerinthus and answered, ‘I recognize you as the first-born of Satan’” (Encyc. Brit., 11th ed., vol. 22, p. 22). By the beginning of the second century, the Churches advocating the hybrid Christianity were gaining in strength. Although it would take another two centuries before they would be given substantial authority, the process of solidification accelerated in the 100s. Interestingly, two of the first five Roman bishops, later designated in the papal lineage, had previously been part of the true Church. These were Clement of Rome and Linus, both ordained by, and assistants to, Paul. They appeared to be influenced by, if not fully caught up in, the false church’s movement. The emerging Roman Catholic Church substituted many tenets of the Babylon Mystery Religion and the Philosophies for the true doctrines of Christ and the apostles. The doctrines of the Sabbath and Holy Days were dismissed as “Judaizing.” The immortality of the soul, and heaven and hell beliefs were adopted and the doctrine of the future millennial rule of the kingdom of God was gradually phased out. The strange doctrine of the trinity, as presented by demented pagan philosophers-turned-theologians, was gradually accepted. Image worship and Mary worship were “in” and the second commandment was “out.” Adherence to the Holy Scriptures to do God’s will was replaced by following the precepts of the “duly ordained authorities.” Stay tuned... 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Nobody: 6:28pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Please pay heed to Splinz's offer. You need the mutumbo to cure your sexual frustration. Abi na... no mind am... (Quote) (Report) (Like) (Share) Family / Re: Most Men Get Married Because They Need A Maid by Splinz(m): 3:20pm pocohantas: How big is it? The length and diameter in inches? ... I wouldn't tell you until you find it inside... (Quote) (Report) (Like) (Share) Romance / Re: What's The Easiest Thing That Gets You Excited? by Splinz(m): 3:02pm ireneony: Surprise me with something They done show Better leme give you what you want now o... (Quote) (Report) (Like) (Share) Family / Re: Most Men Get Married Because They Need A Maid by Splinz(m): 2:35pm pocohantas: Very true. The only thing some of them know how to do is be the head of the house, this title is for them because they have a pe.nis. Yet they complain when women want the best of the lot, like everyone doesn't want the other for something. This is why the whole men should help out in the house is giving some of them erectile dysfunctions. They are okay with being figure heads... Some of them don't even know how to even make love. Love making is similar to atm withdrawals for them...insert, punch keypads and withdraw! You should have tell me you need someone to give you earth shattering orgasm, and I would obliged you. I get both always so I've never been in a position to choose one. Now I can never choose one over the other since am used to both. Hmm. So it has always been an anaconda? Good for you. Anyways, like I've said earlier, a big dick doesn't necessarily guaranteed sexual satisfaction, a small dick can also do it! So in the end, it all boils down to individual preferences... madam anaconda.. PS: Pray there should be sustainability. (Quote) (Report) (Like) (Share) Romance / Re: My Girlfriend Is About To Dump Me Due To My Small joystick, by Splinz(m): 4:47pm On Dec 27, 2016 rokiatu: yea right here we go again. The poster wouldn't have opened this thread in the first place if skills was all he needed. You can have all the skills in the world if your do...ck too small still ain't that pleasing. Di..ck plays a part too. Too small and it's not enjoyable and too big ouch a big no also. Big is just fine. Medium is ok also. Now lets talk about you. Is it sexual satisfaction you need from a man or the size of his dick (Quote) (Report) (Like) (Share) Romance / Re: My Girlfriend Is About To Dump Me Due To My Small joystick, by Splinz(m): 3:48pm On Dec 27, 2016 sumesis30: Pls help me out guys. There is this girl I've been dating for like a month now I really love her so much, she loves me as well but she complains of my very small dick when we had sex. She even went behind my back to purchase a drug that may enlarge my dick to her own satisfaction in which I appreciated her effort and sacrifice. One day like that I invited her to my office to discuss sth bothering me about the issue. I asked that "what if the drug she bought for me doesn't yield results, what will be our fate concerning the relationship. She began to cry, I was even trying to calm her down but all to no avail. She later walked away after the whole discussion Though, later that night we had a little chats on WhatsApp, just normal chats. But I discovered lately that she hasn't been committed since since I have brought that issue up. She didn't even care to ask how I have been using the drug she bought for me but she did all this before. I'm really worried now, I love this girl so much and I don't want to lose her but it seems she has lost faith in the drug she bought for me due to an hopeless statement I made about the drug. She has lessen her hope in our relationship and it seems our relationship is about to hit the rock. We planned to marry eachother but it seems our plan may not come to reality due to her own unseriousness towards me. Can I still convince her that the issue about the joystick enlargement can still be fixed? I want to do anything to get her back. Pls help me to move this to front page. Calm down bro. First, I'm not seeing any love on her part. Do you even know what is love, that an issue like joystick size (small size ) should threatened Let me get something straight here. Is it your dick size she's complaining of or your inability to satisfy her I'm asking because an anaconda size dick doesn't necessarily guaranteed sexual satisfaction. To a woman, I think whether yours is a pencil or Olympic size type, what matters to her is the ability to give her multiple earth shattering orgasm with that rod. Above are the posts of the person judging and condemning the Catholic Church. All his responses have been highlighted "He who lives in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 6:37pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Pidgin2, That is very pathetic from you. You chose to attack the person and not the message. This article could have been posted here by anyone else. Your peurile tactics do not in anyway invalidate the truth he posted. 3 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 6:38pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
WHY do u contradict urself repasting rubbish? simon magnus was a heretic, he tried to buy divine thing with money, he was guilty of simony and is identified as a heretic in the catholic church. How wish u were even well informed in the basics of christain history u would have known that gnosticism is considered a heresy in catholicism and anyone who teaches it, or even obstinately believes it is under pain of excommunication. THE FUNY THING IS THAT JUSTIN MATYR WHO U CALLED A FOLLOWER OF MAGNUS WROTE EXTENSIVELY AGAINST GNOSTICISM. 4 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 6:42pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Ubenedictus: The catholic church appears to abhore Satan too when in fact she is executing Satan's plan on earth. Jesus Christ described Satan as a liar and a murderer from the beginning. Any competent historian knows the number of lies and the magnitude of murders which the catholic church has committed since its promotion to primacy by pagan Roman emperors. 2 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Nobody: 6:52pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien: He consistently judges Catholics and also the church, I am just trying to let him know that judgement should be left for God 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 6:58pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Pidgin2: Judgment is left to GOD but preaching the truth is left to us! |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Nobody: 7:43pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien: I posted the truth so deal with it 4 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 8:00pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien: Let her be bro, I wouldn't stoop to her level. Apparently, the blows I've been dishing to her of lately is driving her nut. And now, this tsunami again? I understand her plight. 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 8:21pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
another interesting thing is that ur article have been quoting eusebeius, but clearly u didn't even read the book u claim to quote. eusebeius wrote that peter was in rome and even died there yet u deny it.. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.vii.xxvi.html NA wa for u, which kind cunny copy and paste u go copy? 2 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 8:21pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Continuation... Other contributors of this counterfeit movement are: Clement (of Rome)—AD 91-100 (as bishop), Ignatius—AD 67-110, Justin Maryr—AD 100-167, Tertullian—AD 158-220, etc. Some noteworthy contributors were Jerome (340-420), Augustine (354-430), and Erasmus (1466-1536). Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, called the Vulgate version. Augustine molded such distorted doctrines as the Catholic Church fulfilling the prophecy of the kingdom of God on Earth. Erasmus, who followed over a millennium later, was a scholar and reformer who encouraged critical examination of the source of one’s beliefs. He was critical of the hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic Church, and the priests, in particular. Thus, Erasmus laid the egg that Martin Luther later hatched—the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century. Some Techniques Used to Legitimize Sunday—A Case in Point There was a particular meeting between Polycarp, the leader of the true Church of God at the onset of the Smyrna Era, and the Bishop of Rome, regarding the Roman church’s erroneous actions of changing the time of the Passover observance to a Sunday. This encounter will be discussed in Chapter Seven. The tactics that the counterfeit movement had used to establish precedent were scandalous and unscrupulous, as the following account reveals. We pick up this account after the above-mentioned meeting. After Polycarp had left the meeting, an unusual letter appeared. This letter is considered by most scholars to have been a deliberate forgery: “Pope Pius, who lived about 147, had made a decree, that the annual solemnity of the Pasch [this Greek word is derived from the Hebrew word pesach] should be kept on the Lord’s day [Sunday] and in confirmation of this he pretended, that Hermes [Hermas] his brother, who was then an eminent teacher among them, had received instruction from an angel, who commanded that all men should keep the Pasch on the Lord’s day” (Antiquities of the Christian Church, Joseph Bingham, pp. 1148-1149). “One of the letters forged in the name of Pius, where one Hermas [Hermes] is mentioned as the author; and it is stated that in his book a commandment was given through an angel to observe the Passover on a Sunday” (Apostolical Fathers, James Donaldson, p. 324). If this letter was invented after Polycarp’s time in an effort to lend weight to the position of Anicetus, then it was a deliberate forgery. Otherwise, Pius himself was the author of this deceptive letter. Pius died just before the visit of Polycarp to Rome. Suppose this incident was not a forgery (notwithstanding, most scholars readily acknowledge that it was) and, in fact, did happen. Suppose Hermes or Pope Pius (or Anicetus) was not lying this time around, and that Hermes did receive instructions from an angel to change the observance of a time that God had established. Would this have opened the door to legitimize those instructions from the “angel,” in God’s view? We must merely look in Galatians 1:8 to establish whether instructions from an angel carry precedence over God’s instructions through His apostles or prophets: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” The account above was chosen to illustrate the Roman Catholics’ underhanded schemes in adopting their hybrid doctrines. They claimed the power to supersede and change the laws of God when deemed necessary. |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 8:26pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:you guys can make silly claims for africa, slinz just goofed by linking simon magus and gnosticis to justin marytr and jerome, then he tried to use eusebeius to contradict himself. instead of helping him defend his unscholarly hypothesis u are here making more unstantiated lies. 3 Likes 1 Share |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 8:41pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Ubenedictus: Really... Peter was in Rome and your first pope  Okay.I'd soon prove according to Scriptures that apostle Peter was never the one that was your pope in Rome. I've already shown you who your true pope was. Deal with it! 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 8:51pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Ubenedictus: Paul wrote 5 letters(Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 2 Timothy and Philemon) from a Roman prison, yet he made no mention of Peter. Why? Acts 28:14-15, Paul met with the brethren in Rome, but made no mention of Peter. Why? Since the book of Acts is the history of the church up until a few years before Peter's death, why didn't the book of Acts mention Peter's visit to Rome, if there was any? When did Peter visit Rome? In Romans 16:1-15, Paul greets 26 people by name. If Peter was the leader of the church in Rome, why did Paul not mention him? 3 Likes 2 Shares |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 8:55pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Early Catholic View of the Sabbath Now for some statements from some of the original architects of Catholic thought, concerning the Sabbath. Justin Martyr’s position exposes their true feelings and ignorance. Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi skillfully condenses the philosophy of Justin Martyr in the following summary statement on page 186 of his book, From Sabbath to Sunday: “The Sabbath for Justin is a temporary ordinance, derived from Moses, which God did not intend to be kept literally, for He Himself ‘does not stop controlling the movement of the universe on that day.’ He imposed it solely on the Jews as ‘a mark to single them out for punishment they so well deserved for their infidelities.’” Justin Martyr’s rank anti-Semitism would almost be humorous, were it not for the deadly persecution, to both Jews and true Christians, that it led to. The next viewpoint is that of Tertullian (made in AD 200), which is also telling: “…if for these and other such rules [for Sunday observance] you insist upon having positive scriptural injunction, you will find none. Tradition will be held forth to you as the originator of them—custom as their strengthener and faith as their preserver…” (De Corona, ch. 4). In view of the above quote, it would be appropriate to quote one 20th century Roman Catholic theologian, Cardinal Gibbons, from Faith of Our Fathers, p. 89, 1917 edition: “A rule of faith, or a competent guide to heaven, must be able to instruct all the truths necessary for salvation. Now the Scriptures alone do not contain all the truths which a Christian is bound to believe, nor do they explicitly enjoin all the duties which he is obliged to practice. Not to mention other examples, is not every Christian obliged to sanctify Sunday and to abstain on that day from unnecessary servile work? Is not the observance of this law among the most promising of our sacred duties? But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” What arrogance! |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 8:58pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien: Excellent questions! Thank you. Imagine Paul's insolence! How could he disrespect his superior- the pope, in such manner, by not acknowledging his presence in Rome 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Splinz(m): 9:23pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
In Summary To conclude this chapter in the development and character of the counterfeit church, here are some classic quotes and observations from perceptive historians concerning the conspiracy that beset the early Church. The Lutheran historian Mosheim expresses what could be the most well-directed and powerful observation by any scholar regarding the apostasy of the early Church. It is a short but profound statement: “Christian churches had scarcely been organized when men rose up, who, not being contented with the simplicity and purity of that religion which the Apostles taught, attempted innovations, and fashioned religion according to their own liking” (Ecclesiastical History, Mosheim, Vol. 1). “Robinson, author of the ‘History of Baptism,’ speaks as follows: ‘Toward the latter end of the second century, most of the churches assumed a new form, the first simplicity disappeared; and insensibly, as the old disciples retired to their graves, their children, along with new converts, both Jews and Gentiles, came forward and new-modeled the cause.’—Eccl. Researches, Chap. 6, p. 51, 1792” (A History of the True Religion, Dugger and Dodd, ch. 5, p. 60). Here is another classic quote, from Jesse Lyman Hurlbut, who refers to the period immediately following the time setting of the book of Acts as the “Age of Shadows.” He states, “...of all periods in the history, it is the one about which we know the least…For fifty years after St. Paul’s life a curtain hangs over the church, through which we strive vainly to look; and when at last it rises, about 120 A.D. with the writings of the earliest church fathers, we find a church in many aspects very different from that in the days of St. Peter and St. Paul” (The Story of the Christian Church, p. 33). THE END PS: This is it! This is the true history! The Catholic church has always been nothing but a synagogue of Satan! 1 Like |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 9:36pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:Is it a must that paul must mention him? john was in ephesus for a long time but no one mention him not even paul in his letter to the ephesians! act isnt a biography of d apostles, infact the narration on peter stopped at chap 11 and dat on paul took over. it is largely puerile bothering on fallacious to claim peter wasnt in rome becos u cant find it in ink in d bible. where did adrew preach? 4 Likes |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 9:37pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
I enjoin you all to follow the link below to see the kind of organization found in the catholic church, which claims to follow Christ: www.nairaland.com/3555177/jesuit-oath |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 9:43pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Splinz:Lol u are back with ur puerile claims which i just refuted. you are d one claiming to be informed quoting from eusebeius. let me inform u on what he wrote. "Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul [2 Tim. 4:10], but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy [2 Tim. 4:21] as his companion at Rome, was Peter’s successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier [Phil. 4:3]" (Church History 3:4:9–10 You cant claim u didnt know, even ur own history sources says so. |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 9:53pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Ubenedictus:Paul wrote Ephesians c.60 A.D. John was not in Ephesus then. act isnt a biography of d apostles, infact the narration on peter stopped at chap 11 and dat on paul took over.Stop lying. Read competent history, not church lies. |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 9:55pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:Another wile goose chase, i rebute this some yrs ago on nairaland, why are u guy also reharsing already rebuted lies? |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 9:59pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:u have been quoting eusebeuis church history here all day, I quoted it back at u and now it is suddenly incompetent. if it is incompetent over go and delete d places u quoted it. |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by DoctorAlien(m): 10:00pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
Ubenedictus: When did I quote eusebius? Are you lying or are you confused? |
| Re: The True Founder And History Of The Catholic Church. by Ubenedictus(m): 10:04pm On Jan 06, 2017 |
DoctorAlien:Sorry, d op quoted eusebius nt u. 1 Like |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (Reply)
What Is The Book Of Enoch And Should It Be In The Bible? / Are You Ready? A Short Message To Christians By Lyoncrescent / What We Should Do To Our Enemies As Christians..
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 145 |