Complete & utter error? Quite a reach you're making there.
From "The Apocalypse Of Saint John": But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaites, which I also hate.
Know who he was or any of the particulars about his heresy?
For you, the gates of hell prevailed in one generation.
Wrong. For me to believe that, I'd have to accept your definition. Since I don't, She still prevails.
(The Mormons try to rescue their position by saying that the gates of hell didn't prevail because the Church was preserved during this time in North America, claiming that Christ came to North America and preached the gospel to the Native Americans.)
That's nice, but we don't make that claim.
No, not a reach. I'll give you two examples. Do you recognize the distinction between biship, presbyter, and deacon? St. Ignatius of Antioch (died in 107 AD) did. Do you accept that the Eucharist becomes the Body and Blood of Christ? St. Ignatius did. I could go on, but it would just be more Catholic stuff that you reject. St. Ignatius was a Catholic (he himself uses the term 'Catholic'), and he died (as an elderly man) in 107 AD. The Apostle John died around 100 AD. So either (1) the Church fell into complete error in the seven years after John died, or (2) John knew about all this apostasy in the Church but couldn't or didn't do anything about it, or (3) what St. Ignatius says is exactly what the Apostles were teaching. Which is it?
-A8