Posted on 10/27/2006 8:14:39 PM PDT by Salvation
Read it again ---
I have read a number of these early writings on various websites. More often than not I find them to be inconclusive about details unless they're specifically referencing some heretic or event. Often times these writing are very vague. Although they're good for the general thought of the early Christians, people make far too much out of them.
I would say that if Ignatius states Paul and Peter to be in Rome, then there MIGHT have been some truth to it and most likely was. That doesn't confirm anything-certainly not Peter living there for 25 years. He doesn't say that and gives the impression of just the opposite. One father building upon Ignatius writings, which I can read, becomes nothing more than a myth.
I wouldn't idly speculate about the "evils" of early Popes. I think there is enough factual information about some of the later ones to form conclusions. Pope Leo wanted people to kiss his dirty muddy toes, and this is someone who the Catholics feels infallibly made decisions for the Church? Pope Horatio was considered a heretic after he served 16 years and they burned all his writings so what does that say? They ran one Pope (Urbana???) out of the Vatican. For a number of years the Catholics had two (sometimes three) Popes serving in various parts of Europe although they would like to say there has always only been one, even though both were duly elected. And then there is the infamous legend of Pope "Joan" but we won't go there. I'm not impress when the Catholics try to explain to me the pedigree line of Popes.
BTW-I noticed you do not subscribe to "replacement" theology. Christians do not "replace" our Jewish forefathers but we have been grafted in to the heritage of Abraham. This isn't just the teaching of both Catholic and Protestants, this is the teaching of scripture as well. Paul is clear on the fact that we believing Gentiles have been "grafted in" with the Jews. Unbelieving Jews are not children of Abraham. Jewish believers are our forefathers. It is difficult to argue with the plain teaching of scripture written mostly by Jews. If your looking into history, I would suggest you look more objectively into this matter.
wow, so many comments.
Tell me why I should.
Your church claims that YOU can't know for certain if you are saved, until you die and go thru purgatory...
Apparently you have problem actually reading what I say. I never said you personally can't know of your salvation, I said you cannot judge another persons soul. You may know of your own salvation, but you cannot know mine, know matter how much you think you can.
And yet I speak of Jesus and lost souls and not of myself...
your opinion IS of yourself, and not of Christ. And as I recall you told me to post my personal testimony and YOU would give me your opinion as to whether or not it was real or not. You don't speak for Christ, you speak for Iscool. I am not interested in what Iscool thinks of my soul, I am only interested in what Christ thinks of my soul.Notice I have not called any of your beliefs false, nor have I questioned your salvation,nor have I judged you based on which church you choose to worship, I have only defended myself against you.
I understand this is not scripture, but it is interesting how some things just seem to line up....when we take the blinders off.
Amen. Good words for us all to live by.
Yep, he told the Disciples (except Judas, who was doing something else at the time] to go into all the world. Don't you agree?
What is this, Tangle with Catholics weekend or something?
Tell that to John Hagee, and Benny Hinn, and TBN, and Chuck Missler, and Rod Parsley and.......
It's sort of economic in its simplicity. They tell us we have blinders on, that we don't love the truth and all that, so it's pretty clear this is not about reasoned persuasion but about venting. And there's less expense of time and mental effort if they don't trouble to find out what we really believe, but the joy of venting is undiminished.
Hence the weird remarks --remarks that often leave me scratching my head and wondering WHERE did THAT come from?
Oh and then there's the "We know what you REALLY belive, better than YOU do."
Of course, I'm just back from my Masonic meeting where, as soon as we got went through our correspondence with the tri-lateral commission we engaged in fertility rites celebrating the union of Jesus with Mary Magdalene, aka the Holy Grail, and the preservation of their bloodline in the person of Madonna. (Does she have a great disguise or WHAT?) So I MAY have missed something. But somehow I think not. Tell Simon Magus "hey," for me, okay? He should remember who I am. After all, I paid good money for this power ...
(shaking head ...)
I saw Hagee just once on TV--by mistake, I'm happy to say.
What he ws saying seemed incredulous to me.
So I went to his website.
Jack Chick impersonator, he is.
'preciate that. :-)
Who promises that? Not the Roman Catholic Church, any more than we say Popes can't err.
If you're really interested in persuading us, perhaps it would help if you learned what we believe. Every time you make some claim about us that isn't true, you forfeit your claim to be taken seriously.
"Every time you make some claim about us that isn't true,, you forfeit your claim to be taken seriously"
True.
I think we're done here.
BRAVO!
People who limit the Word of God to what they believe Jesus said when they read and interpret their translation of the Bible miss a whole lot.
How is that?
If you look in the "Authorized Version" of the New Testament you'll find three words missing. "Amen" at the end of The Book of Acts, "Amen" at the end of The Book of James and "Amen" at the end of III John. The Greek manuscripts of the received text also do not show any "Amen" for these three books.
All of the other books of the New Testament have a formal closing....except these three. The Acts, as we have been discussing, is primarily a history of the first few years of the Church and spends most of the time with Paul. It ends abruptly with Paul still in Rome under house arrest. We know that he was taken to Rome twice but the book of Acts only covers this first incarceration. We touched on the fact that he may have gone on to Spain and Britain between these two arrests but no scripture will verify that. I believe that the Book of Acts is yet to be finished and it may or may not be the "Sonnini Manuscript" (post #617). Nevertheless it has no formal closing!
The book of James is addressed to whom???? The Twelve Tribes scattered among the Nations. We have been discussing the ministry of the Twelve Apostles, primarily Peter, and where he (they) did go. Well, we know that our Lord and Saviour told them in [Matthew 10:5-6] not to go among the Gentiles or Samaritans but go to the "Lost Sheep of the House of Israel"......the twelve tribes scattered among the Nations. We also know that this is exactly where the Apostle Peter went. He writes from Babylon to God's elect! [1 Peter 1:1-2] These folks are Israelites, scattered during the dispersion and they have a Foreknowledge of God. They are not Gentiles! And James is addressing these folks also and probably many others to whom Peter and the other Apostles are visiting... or soon to visit. I believe the Book of James in incomplete also because I don't believe the Lord wants yet to disclose exactly where these Israelites were....or now are...yet.
This brings us to III John....and Simon Magus. As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, John wrote late....and as such, was well aware of the corruption of the Gospel which began immediately after Pentecost and was well under way by the time he wrote his Epistles, Gospel and Revelation. John mentions in verses 9 and 10 that there is malicious gossip and shunning by one of the bishops, Diotrephes, and he has excommunicated some and refuses entry to others. He puts himself first (verse 9). These passages show what Paul refers to more than once...[Galatians 1:6][II Thessalonians 2:3-7][Acts 20:29-30][II Timothy 2:17-18] and of course, [Jude 4]. This diabolical counterfeit religion of Simon Magus had crept into the early Church and John did not even dare to put it in writing [III John 13]. He wanted to wait and see "Gaius" in person to discuss the matter further....face to face!
For this reason, and the lack of an "Amen" at the close of III John, it tells me that his book is yet incomplete also and we will learn more later on about this sinister corruption of the Gospel by Simon Magus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.