Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Mad Dawg

“See of Rome.”

I believe in the See of Jesus Christ. There were churches following Christ up into the Caucuses Mountains and Eastern Europe, and all the way to Northwest Europe in the first three centuries which had never heard of the “See of Rome.”


4,740 posted on 01/18/2010 8:33:33 PM PST by John Leland 1789 (But then, I'm accused of just being a troll, so . . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4703 | View Replies ]


To: John Leland 1789

INDEED.

And in India.

What a come down from submitting to Christ Alone to submitting to a man and a club of bureaucratic political power mongers.


4,748 posted on 01/18/2010 9:44:56 PM PST by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 TRAITORS http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4740 | View Replies ]

To: John Leland 1789; Mad Dawg; Quix
I believe in the See of Jesus Christ. There were churches following Christ up into the Caucuses Mountains and Eastern Europe, and all the way to Northwest Europe in the first three centuries which had never heard of the “See of Rome.”

Quite incorrect. The Churches you refer to are:
1. in the Caucasus (Armenian and Georgian) which were in communion with orthodoxy (i.e what is now termed the Catholic and Orthodox Churches) -- they are and were Apostolic Churches, part of the ONE Catholic and Apostolic Church. And yes, they not only heard of the "See of Rome", they were also in communion with it and with Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople etc. until Chalcedon.

2. In Eastern Europe, you refer to the Arians who only started preaching there around 3rd century -- which other groups do you refer to?

3. North-west Europe? You refer to Ireland? Those were converts through Rome and were in communion with Rome until the Barbarian invasions. Post that, their theology was the same (Celtic Christianity is a misnomer, the differernces are not theological but rather revolving around ecclesiastic versus monasterical authority and around dates of Easter).

4. India -- that does show lack of knowledge. +Thomas came to India (South india -- specifically to Kodungallur/Cranganore in the state of Kerala) because there was a Jewish community there who had been there centuries -- India was trading with Rome for centuries -- there is even a reference to this trade by Roman writers of this time. Hence, they were not only aware of Rome, there was regular contact with Rome (the monsoon winds brought traders along from Arabia Felix every June and they returned back in October)
4,758 posted on 01/19/2010 3:29:04 AM PST by Cronos (Philipp2:12, 2Cor5:10, Rom2:6, Matt7:21, Matt22:14, Lu12:42-46,John15:1-10,Rev2:4-5,Rev22:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4740 | View Replies ]

To: John Leland 1789

I know one can’t prove a negative, but to suggest that the early congregations had not heard of Rome or a congregation in Rome seems kind of a stretch to me. I just don’t believe it and I don’t see what would lead one to think so.


4,761 posted on 01/19/2010 3:39:15 AM PST by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4740 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson