Well, then I guess we can make the distinction that Osama Bin Laden never killed a single person on 9/11. The distinction isn't just fine, it is inappropriate.
Funny about the Donatists. You say we know well what they taught. Another Roman Catholic apologist on the internet that I was reading today said "We don't know what they believed, but we know that they didn't believe like the Baptists!" I don't dispute that they weren't entirely Baptistic, but I would dispute that we have a lot of understanding about what they believed. We know that they rebaptized those who had left the church.
The facts are, when Rome adopted Christianity, the whole character of the church changed. What used to be a persecuted church held largely in houses and smaller facilities was now the official state religion. As an American, you should understand what was REALLY meant by separation of Church and State and why. When the state takes over in matters of faith, dissent becomes rebellion against the State. The power of the State is then used to move justice against those who hold contrary to what the State wants and true religion is cast aside. Kings are manipulated and manipulate to get the power that so many crave and Christ becomes a mere tool to achieve it. The Catholic church killed nobody? Perhaps they didn't light the match, but they caused many to be burned and hung and drawn and quartered. Kings who ran into difficulties with Popes in their political ambitions were threatened with excommunication (see King John and Henry III of England for example).
Regardless, the faith delivered to the apostles is the same as the Reformers. If the entire church were blinded to this faith during the middle ages (it wasn't), my stand would still be on the Word of God for it is life and truth and God's revelation of Himself to mankind. What compliments it, I will entertain. What stands against it, is anathema.
He did -- he directed the operation. But it would be correct to say that a cleric who taught Wahabism did not. A the Holy Inquisition did was identify heresies. I do the same on this thread. Besides, the early Church did not have the Holy Inquisition.
You say we know well what [donatists] taught
Sure we do. We have Against Donatus by S.t Auggustine just off the top of my head.
when Rome adopted Christianity, the whole character of the church changed. What used to be a persecuted church held largely in houses and smaller facilities was now the official state religion
You are not celebrating the persecutions, are you? The point is, however much you prefer separation of Church and state (look to the USSR's constitution for a legal prototype), the doctrines of the Church were fully formed by the time of the Theodosius decree (De Fide Catolica, AD 380).
the faith delivered to the apostles is the same as the Reformers
You cannot prove a single important distinguishing element of the reformed faith from scripture. This is a comical assertion.
Terrific post. Thanks for jumping in, with work right now I'm just in and out too quickly.
It seems to be an old pattern I've only recently come to recognize. Claims are made such as "Protestant beliefs have only been around since the Reformation",or "we created the Canon of Scripture" as though they are fact even though the historical record is clear that these claims are false.