POPE FRANCIS CONDEMNS EUROPE’S ANCIENT WALLS AGAINST ISLAM

FPM ^ | February 24, 2017 | Raymond Ibrahim

[zot]

Thanks for the ping. Good article. Bad Pope.

[StormPrepper]

Really? You want to do this now?

Why not? It's a legitimate point.

What are you talking about the “people chose Linus”?? The very oldest source we have (Irenaeus, ca. 160-180) says that the Apostle Peter personally appointed Linus, Cletus, and Clement over the Roman Church.

Rome was not the leadership of Christ's Church. The Church had a congregation in Rome and Linus was a Bishop over that congregation. You're confusing today's definition of the Catholic church with the Christ's church organization. They no way close to being the same thing.

Bishops in the original church were responsible for their local congregations. And that was Linus' responsibility.

Also, two Eastern bishops: Polycarp, who sat at the feet of St. John, and Ignatius who likely did as well, both went to Rome, and both spoke in glowing terms about the Roman Church.

Again, Rome had a congregation. It was not the head of the Church. It wasn't the "Roman church", it was the congregation in Rome.

Neither had any notion that the leaders who followed Peter “were not of God” of Christ’s Real Church as you claim.

The Catholic church retrofitted those titles and positions in order to claim legitimacy. There was a Bishop in Ephesus and Corinth, etc... They were the leaders in there respective locations.

However, the leadership of the whole of Christ's Church remained with a Prophet who held the position of an Apostle. And that was John.

Linus could not be the leader of the Church because John was alive. And God proved that by speaking to John face to face.

Linus lead an apostasy movement that became the Catholic church. You are seeing the results today. That's why God doesn't and hasn't ever spoken to a Pope face to face.

[ColdOne]

He isn’t a Pope, he is evil. Taken over by evil forces. Soros.

[Iscool]

People have cut this guy a mile of slack because he’s, you know, the Pope. But he’s also a dangerous blithering idiot, put in place by the same nefarious forces that gave us bambi, and needs to shut his holy pie-hole.

Yet he is the leader of the Catholic religion...How many Catholics are going to suck up every word he speaks??? How many Catholics are going to go 'ecumenical' with the muzlims just because their pope tells them to???

[Iscool]

Also, two Eastern bishops: Polycarp, who sat at the feet of St. John, and Ignatius who likely did as well, both went to Rome, and both spoke in glowing terms about the Roman Church.

Naw...PolyCarp may have looked favorably on the church at Rome like he did the church at Jerusalem and Corinth, but Roman Church??? PolyCarp??? Now there's some real perversion of history...

[Albion Wilde]

Pope JP2 must be spinning in his grave.

[Claud]

Bishops in the original church were responsible for their local congregations.

So then why was the Church of Corinth writing to the church of Rome to settle a dispute over the succession in 1 Clement?

Linus lead an apostasy movement that became the Catholic church.

Bull. You find me one ancient historical source that says that.

[Claud]

PolyCarp may have looked favorably on the church at Rome like he did the church at Jerusalem and Corinth, but Roman Church??? PolyCarp??? Now there's some real perversion of history...

Yes or no: Did Polycarp maintain communion with the Church at Rome under Anicetus or did he not?

Because if he did, then according to StormPrepper's strange version of "history", he was communion with an apostate Church.

[al_c]

No, Internet. The Vatican is Not a Walled City

[StormPrepper]

[Stormprepper]Linus lead an apostasy movement that became the Catholic church.

[Claud]Bull. You find me one ancient historical source that says that.

A logical fallacy on so many levels. You're asking me to go back in history and find a document that was, for millennia, controlled by the Catholic Church that states that the Catholic Church is an "apostasy movement". mmm k

All anyone, that is actually seeking truth, has to do is compare the actions of the Catholic Church through history, with the instructions and teachings of Christ and His Apostles. No where did Christ tell His Church to burn people at the stake or start wars in His name, just to name a few differences.

What I said earlier is all true. The Apostles were given authority under the hand of Christ Himself to lead His people. While the Catholic Church claims that Linus was the head of the Church, John, a living Apostle was still on the earth. And was talking to God face to face.

Therefore, Linus could not have been the head of the Church. Nor was Linus an Apostle. Nor have there been any Apostles in the Catholic Church. Nor prophets for that matter.

God's pattern from Adam and all through human history has been to raise up prophets and speak to them face to face to remove any confusion. The prophet then relays the message to the people.

Rev 11 is very clear that there are prophets in the last days. Again there are no prophets in the Catholic Church. That tells me that the Catholic Church cannot be Christ's true Church.

[Claud]

A logical fallacy to demand historical evidence of a historical assertion?

That’s not how this works my friend. You don’t get to invent your own history because you don’t like the sources we have. If you don’t like what Eusebius, or Irenaeus, or anyone else wrote, then show me how and where they were wrong.

And competent historians know how to pull out the opposition’s arguments from the Catholic sources. When Origen wrote “Against Celsus”, he cited many of Celsus’s arguments. Augustine’s works are full of Manichean beliefs that he refuted.

[StormPrepper]

A logical fallacy to demand historical evidence of a historical assertion?

It's a logical fallacy to appeal to authority. Not too mention a red herring and a straw man.

I don't need a historical source to give authority to an already well established timeline of historical events.

The time frame of the book of Revelation as written by John is known. The time of Linus and Clement are also known. I don't need a historical source to over lap the two.

Nor am I obligated to find a Catholic source proclaiming the Catholic Church being apostate. Unless you count Martin Luther...

I can however, look at documented historical events involving the Catholic church and evaluate those events as compared to the teachings of Jesus Christ on my own. Such events like the Spanish Armada, which was an attempt by the Catholic Church to win back England from the protestants by way of war. This event is not in dispute. And completely contrary to the commandments of God as given by Jesus Christ Himself.

I look at the writings of Paul, where he explicitly says that in the last days there would be false churches teaching the doctrines of the devil. Paul saw this in vision and stated that a sign would be that they forbid to marry. Being these are the last days, the very time Paul saw in vision, which of all the churches have any laws forbidding marriage? The Catholic church forbids every member of it's leadership from marrying. There's no one else Paul could have seen in that vision. That certainly doesn't describe my Church.

[EURASLEEP]

Almost every week this pope comes out with some new crazy statement, that is either anti-Christian, pro-terrorist, Marxist/Communist, etc. I have lost count how many shameful things he has stated at this point. He needs to be concerned about doing his job: shepherding his flock at the spiritual level, and stop trying to be a Marxist social activist.