Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Question reformed theology?
- Thread starter donadams
- Start date
I'm afraid you'll have to be more clear.
The reformation had to do with practices by the CC that Luther did not agree with and he had the power to get those changes he wanted nailed to the door in Whittenberg Church without getting himself killed.
I do agree with you BTW.
But are you stating that the reformed faith is teaching that the church was wrong before the reformation in its doctrine?
Jethro Bodine
Member
Did you know the change from the old covenant to the new is referred to as the reformation? I do not subscribe to reformed theology but they did not consider it a change of truth but rather a return to truth.
Yes that’s the only place in scripture that refers to a reformation heb 9:10 but that was accomplished by the authority of Jesus Christ, what authority did Luther or any so called reformers have? Are the apostles? Who are they to claim to reform what God has established or revealed?
Truth is immutable and the church founded by Christ on Peter Matt 16:18-19 and the apostles eph 2:20 without error Jn 16:13 teaching and sanctifying all men Matt 28:19 until Christ returns in glory!
What authority did Luther have?
Was he an apostle?
Are you gonna be a brain surgeon or a double naught spy?
Miss Jane says these pictures is Rembrandt’s, Jed says we will he gets them back!
Granny says I’m going to smoke some crawdads but first I need a little pot! Lol!
Miss Jane says these pictures is Rembrandt’s, Jed says we will he gets them back!
Granny says I’m going to smoke some crawdads but first I need a little pot! Lol!
The church that was established by Peter, the CC, went awry somewhere between 300AD and 2000AD.
I'd say it started in the 400 to 600's and got progressively worse.
It might have been the will of God to reform the original church.
Maybe they had gone too far off the track?
Maybe it needed to be brought back?
Maybe Luther was God's instrument in getting the changes accomplished.
Do you think the CC is better today or during the middle ages?
Where does the Bible say these things
Matt 16:18-19 shall not prevail
Jn 16:13 Jn 8:32 church of the apostles has truth we must hear Matt 18:17 church pillar of truth 1 Tim 3:15
Dorothy Mae
Member
Jesus established the church, not Peter. Peter wasn’t even the head of the Church in his day, James was. No one then thought Peter was establishing the church. That’s a catholic concoction to validate them as being the only true christian church. It’s no where in any of the writings of Paul, John or even Peter himself.
I didn't quote the bible in my post to you.
I offered you history of the church.
Which part of what I stated do you not agree with?
If James established the church,
then why did the other "popes" go to Peter in Rome when they had a question about theology or Christology?
James was the "Pope" of Jerusalem.
There were 5 Popes at the time:
Jerusalem
Rome
Antioch
Alexandria
Constantinople
You can accept history or not.
The CC is the original church.
You can accept that or not.
As to the writings of Paul, or John or Peter himself,
I do remind you that HISTORY continued onward forever, even AFTER the letters were written.
That history is available, BTW - I didn't make it up.
Jethro Bodine
Member
The Catholic church has strayed so far from the pure and simple doctrines of the Bible that I don't think it matters. I prefer to view the first church as that which is depicted in the Bible. I just don't see the Catholic church in the pages of the Bible. Never have.
Jethro Bodine
Member
Who were the 'Popes' of Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople during the time of the Apostles?
Dorothy Mae
Member
I repeat Jesus the Christ established the church, not Peter, Paul or James. The first Pope was Constantine. The early church was forbidden to call any man “Pope” by Jesus so certainly they didn’t have “popes” coming to
Peter. But I’m curious, where do you get this idea from? Certainly not the NT which never mentions Peter as the head or “Pope?”
The catholics started with Constantine. He was the first Pontifus Maximums. That’s the record of history. You can believe it or not.
Which church was depicted in the bible?
People me in homes and were afraid of persecution.
The CC should not be seen in the pages of the bible, as I understand you to mean.
But the CC can trace its origins back to Peter, who was one of the first popes.
Which church WAS the first church according to you?
It certainly wasn't any of the Protestant churches that didn't even exist till the 1,500's.
It could be argued if it was the Orthodox Church that split from the CC in about 1,000AD.
The first Pope was Constantine?
Could you post some support please?
I'm not here to teach anybody anything.
Look up the history of the church.
Did I say there were popes during the times of the Apostles?
Am I the only person on this forum that knows church history?
No. Seriously.
Only because it's you Jethro....
I do believe much can be discovered on Prof. Google's site.
Apart from the allusion to Rome in the First Letter of Peter, there is no historical evidence that St. Peter was Rome’s first bishop or that he was martyred in Rome (according to tradition, he was crucified upside down) during a persecution of the Christians in the mid-60s CE. By the end of the 1st century, however, his presence in the imperial capital was recognized by Christian leaders, and the city was accorded a place of honour, perhaps because of its claim to the graves of both Saints Peter and Paul. In 1939 what were believed to be Peter’s bones were found under the altar of the basilica dedicated to him, and in 1965 Pope Paul VI (1963–78) confirmed them as such. Rome’s primacy was also fostered by its many martyrs, its defense of orthodoxy, and its status as the capital of the Roman Empire. By the end of the 2nd century, Rome’s stature was further bolstered by the Petrine theory, which claimed that Jesus Christ had designated Peter to be his representative on earth and the leader of the church and that this ministry was passed on to Peter’s successors as bishops of Rome. Peter received this authority, according to the theory, when Jesus referred to him as the rock of the church and said to him, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:18–19). The Roman position of honour was challenged in the middle of the 3rd century when Pope Stephen I (254–257) and St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, clashed over Stephen’s claim to doctrinal authority over the universal church. Nonetheless, in the critical period between Popes Damasus I (366–384) and Leo I (440–461), nine popes made a strong case for Rome’s supremacy, despite a growing challenge from the see of Constantinople, the capital of the Eastern Empire.
Leo, one of only two popes accorded the appellation “the Great,” played a pivotal role in the early history of the papacy. Assuming the title pontifex maximus, or chief priest, he made an important distinction between the person of the pope and his office, maintaining that the office assumed the full power bestowed on Peter. Although the Council of Chalcedon—called and largely directed by the Eastern emperor Marcian in 451—accorded the patriarch of Constantinople the same primacy in the East that the bishop of Rome held in the West, it acknowledged that Leo I spoke with the voice of Peter on matters of dogma, thus encouraging papal primacy. The link between Peter and the office of the bishop of Rome was stressed by Pope Gelasius I (492–496), who was the first pope to be referred to as the “vicar of Christ.” In his “theory of the two swords,” Gelasius articulated a dualistic power structure, insisting that the pope embodied spiritual power while the emperor embodied temporal power. This position, which was supported by Pope Pelagius I (556–561), became an important part of medieval ecclesiology and political theory.
The medieval papacy
Although much about the early popes remains shrouded in darkness, scholars agree that the bishops of Rome were selected in the same manner as other bishops—that is, elected by the clergy and people of the area (though there is some evidence that some of the early bishops attempted to appoint their successors). Elections were not always peaceful, however, and rival candidates and factions often prompted imperial intervention; eventually the emperors presided over elections. After the collapse of the Western Empire in 476, the involvement of the Eastern emperor in papal affairs was gradually replaced by that of Germanic rulers and leading Roman families. As political instability plagued the old Western Empire in the early Middle Ages, popes were often forced to make concessions to temporal authorities in exchange for protection. After the demise of effective Byzantine control of Italy in the 8th century, the papacy appealed to the new Germanic rulers for support, serving as a symbol of imperial glory for them.source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/papacy
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Pentarchy, after the Greek for “five leaders,” refers to the five patriarchates in the early church. Originally, these patriarchates were located in important Roman cities that were significant for Christians for several reasons. First, the Christian community in each city was founded by one of the Twelve Apostles. Second, the cities contained large Christian communities led by a prominent bishop. The five patriarchates and their founders are: Rome, founded by Peter; Constantinople, founded by Andrew; Alexandria, founded by Mark; Antioch, founded by Peter; and Jerusalem, founded by James.
Although all five patriarchates still exist, several factors contributed to their decreasing role in Christianity. The bishops of Rome had historical problems with the apostolic roots of Constantinople. Schisms divided the early church, especially Alexandria and Antioch. In the seventh century, Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria fell to Arab Muslim armies. After the Latin sack of Constantinople in 1204, the churches of East and West, which had drifted apart, definitively broke communion with one another.
source: https://cnewa.org/pentarchy-50899/#:~:text=The five patriarchates and their,their decreasing role in Christianity.
There's much more if you're really interested.
It's church history.
The church didn't just appear after Jesus died.
It took years for it to be established.
The first Christians were still part of the Jewish Tradition.
Eventually they were no longer welcomed, I'd say about 100AD.
This might also interest you:
Pentarchy - Wikipedia
Dorothy Mae
Member
- Constantine was the first Pontifex Maximus (Pope) of the Holy Roman Empire. The very reasons why the Pope today holds the title Pontifex Maximus and why he is called Pope and he will rule the Holy One World Empire from Jerusalem.
What do you think you’re doing when you quote what you believe is history?
I did. There’s the catholic version which changed it including their bible until it was discovered.
But if you BELIEVE that the New Testament church called Peter “the Pope” please provide scriptures to that effect.
The keys are with Jesus. He has the keys to heaven and hell (Revelation 1:18). If you remember Jesus said to Peter, upon THIS Rock I will build MY church. Jesus is the rock.
.
Last edited:
Peter is the rock.
Or what Jesus said makes absolutely no sense.
Even Protestant scholars admit to this.
The Keys represent authority.
Jesus gave the keys to Peter.
Jesus gave Simon the name Cephus.
Cephus means rock.
And upon this rock I will build my church.
Why call someone a rock....
and say UPON THIS ROCK I will build my church?