Replies

“Sounds sort-of, kind-of like the structure of the particular Church (a/k/a a diocese) to me.”

But a Roman Catholic diocese sees the Pope as the head of the church, the perpetual “head” and ruler over all other Bishops. Ignatius calls Polycarp’s Bishop “God”:

“Ignatius, who is [also called] Theophorus, to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, or rather, who has as his own bishop God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ: [wishes] abundance of happiness.” (Epistle to Polycarp)

Also, a church government is not the same thing as soteriology.

What you must prove is: 1) The Primacy of Rome is a perpetual doctrine that has always existed.

2) That they held to the same beliefs as Roman Catholicism does today.

Both of which, even the very first, cannot be established.

“OK, whatever.”

Indeed, your post was just one big “whatever”.

Also, a church government is not the same thing as soteriology.

Of course ecclesiology is a different topic than soteriology.

But a Roman Catholic diocese sees the Pope as the head of the church, the perpetual “head” and ruler over all other Bishops. Ignatius calls Polycarp’s Bishop “God”:

It seems that Clement of Rome (the Fourth Pope after Peter, Linus, and Cletus) sure thought he was:

If, however, any shall disobey the words spoken by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger; but we shall be innocent of this sin, and, instant in prayer and supplication, shall desire that the Creator of all preserve unbroken the computed number of His elect in the whole world through His beloved Son Jesus Christ…
Letter to the Corinthians, 59
Right is it, therefore, to approach examples so good and so many, and submit the neck and fulfil the part of obedience, in order that, undisturbed by vain sedition, we may attain unto the goal set before us in truth wholly free from blame. Joy and gladness will you afford us, if you become obedient to the words written by us and through the Holy Spirit root out the lawless wrath of your jealousy according to the intercession which we have made for peace and unity in this letter.…
Ibid, 63

(It is important that the reader understand that Corinth was a different Diocese from Rome, but yet Clement asserted authority over the Church in Corinth)

Then, of course, we have the Council of Sardica (AD 344) that says:

Bishop Hosius said: This also it is necessary to add—that no bishop pass from his own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless indeed he be called by his brethren, that we seem not to close the gates of charity.
And this case likewise is to be provided for, that if in any province a bishop has some matter against his brother and fellow bishop, neither of the two should call in as arbiters bishops from another province.
But if perchance sentence be given against a bishop in any matter and he supposes his case to be not unsound but good, in order that the question may be reopened, let us, if it seem good to your charity, honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, and let those who gave judgment write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, so that, if necessary, the case may be retried by the bishops of the neighbouring provinces and let him appoint arbiters; but if it cannot be shown that his case is of such a sort as to need a new trial, let the judgment once given not be annulled, but stand good as before.

I could continue on with multiple additional quotes, but it won't convince you of anything, so why bother.

RH: Please I understand "stir the pot" is what happens at FR and makes it a great place to come. You were polite and reasoned and I hope I addressed what you asked. Maybe I just don't see a big difference in Arminian doctrine as a Calvinist might see, but ask them, they are not calling each other heretics.

GPH: Indeed, your post was just one big “whatever”.

Redleghunter:

This is why I don't like getting into it with belligerent Calvinists. I get the impression (whether intended or not, I don't know) that they are utterly convinced that I am not one of the predestined and am going to Hell and all Heaven can't stop it. And they want to make sure that I know it.

That's not all Calvinists. I no more agree with Alex or Gamecock than with GPH, but there's not the fundamental unpleasantness characterized in their posts...as a general rule (and I'm sure the same...saying "generally"...would apply to me as well, I hope)

(In fact, I try to ping them to satire pieces I post from time to time if I think they'd enjoy it; both of them ping me to satire they think I'd appreciate...and somehow I ended up on Gamecock's mega-church ping list...go figure)