I think most protestants would settle on the actions of the Medici popes that proved the fatality in infallibility. The Word could not be corrupted. Men could.
Unfortunately, this led to a lot of division in Christianity in interpretation from the Amish to Baptists. This has somewhat weakened Christianity’s political power. An unfortunate side effect.
For Matthew to have a column today, first he must invent a straw man to rail against...
1. the whole idea of praying to “saints” instead of to God directly.
2. the just flat out creepy way they are obsessed with Mary
3. the apparent primacy of church tradition over biblical teachings.
4. the apparent disdain for the intelligence of their congregation to discern truth on their own through a study of the scriptures.
For your ping lists.
“We have writings from many of them, including Pope St. Clement I, St. Barnabas, St. Polycarp, and St. Ignatius of Antioch.”
From Clemens Romanus, the alleged “Pope” you mention, on Sola Fide, Predestination, and the immutability of God’s will:
“Whosoever will candidly consider each particular, will recognise the greatness of the gifts which were given by him. For from him have sprung the priests and all the Levites who minister at the altar of God. From him also [was descended] our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. Romans 9:5 From him [arose] kings, princes, and rulers of the race of Judah. Nor are his other tribes in small glory, inasmuch as God had promised, Your seed shall be as the stars of heaven. All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (1st Letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 32. We are Justified Not by Our Own Works, But by Faith.)
“Let us consider, then, brethren, of what matter we were made—who and what manner of beings we came into the world, as it were out of a sepulchre, and from utter darkness. He who made us and fashioned us, having prepared His bountiful gifts for us before we were born, introduced us into His world. Since, therefore, we receive all these things from Him, we ought for everything to give Him thanks; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (Ibid., Chapter 38. Let the Members of the Church Submit Themselves, and No One Exalt Himself Above Another.)
“By the word of His might He established all things, and by His word He can overthrow them. Who shall say unto Him, What have you done? Or, Who shall resist the power of His strength? When, and as He pleases, He will do all things, and none of the things determined by Him shall pass away.” (Ibid., Chapter 27. In the Hope of the Resurrection, Let Us Cleave to the Omnipotent and Omniscient God.)
Ignatius on predestination and final perseverence:
“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia, deservedly most happy, being blessed in the greatness and fullness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning of time, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace.” (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Ephesians, Ch. 0)
“Seeing, then, all things have an end, these two things are simultaneously set before us— death and life; and every one shall go unto his own place. For as there are two kinds of coins, the one of God, the other of the world, and each of these has its special character stamped upon it, [so is it also here.] The unbelieving are of this world; but the believing have, in love, the character of God the Father by Jesus Christ, by whom, if we are not in readiness to die into His passion, His life is not in us.” (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Magnesians, Ch. 5)
“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that wills all things” (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans. Ch. 0)
“I give you these instructions, beloved, assured that you also hold the same opinions [as I do]. But I guard you beforehand from those beasts in the shape of men, whom you must not only not receive, but, if it be possible, not even meet with; only you must pray to God for them, if by any means they may be brought to repentance, which, however, will be very difficult. Yet Jesus Christ, who is our true life, has the power of [effecting] this.” (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Ch. 4)
“Flee, therefore, those evil offshoots [of Satan], which produce death-bearing fruit, whereof if any one tastes, he instantly dies. For these men are not the planting of the Father. For if they were, they would appear as branches of the cross, and their fruit would be incorruptible.” (Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians, Ch. 11)
The real question is, when did the Romish church apostatize from the faith?
timing I dont have a clue’..
maybe it was the INDULGENCES deal?
That would have been a real deal breaker for me.
2) Pederasty ignored with innocents violated, and protecting the perpetrators while abandoning the victims.
3) Call no man Father.
4) Only God can forgive sins.
That said, thank you for keeping literacy and the Word alive in the Dark Ages. And I am happy with being a Protestant. Now can we go back to beating up the devil while he tries to divide the faithful of various stripes? While this thread goes on for several thousand posts, Satan is busy stealing our children. Only a fool fights in a burning house. And, I'm done.
The first assembly of the called out was the household of Abraham, who all left country, kindred and home to cross over at the call of the LORD. Apostasy from that community led Lot to turn his face toward Sodom.
The same turning away was evident within forty days of the children of Israel promising "All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient." (Exodus 24:7) The Golden Calf incident nearly led to the total obliteration of this particular disobedient ekklesia or "son" which had been called out of Egypt. Only Moses and Joshua would have been spared.
Joshua's renewal of protection (Joshua 1:5) was as contingent upon his effort toward obedience as that of the children at Mt. Horeb:
"Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to do according to all the law that Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go. This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. (Joshua 1:8,9)"
Skipping ahead to the contemporary assembly that Jesus called out, the apostatic process was evident to Jude who reminded his readers that if the wayward children in the wilderness were not spared, why should their fate following disobedience be different?
The process of turning away is not a singular event in history, rather it is a consequence of the human "sin nature".
The question is from what did those in ancient days turn?
This is a simple one.
February 27, 380 (OS), when all subjects of the Roman Empire were forced by imperial decree to follow the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria. The Church was no longer Jesus Christ’s but a tool of Rome.
It creeps protestants out that the RCC is so obsessed with us. Why are Roman Catholics always peeking in our window? They act like a dumped girlfriend that just won’t let go.
I’m curious as to how Catholics suppose there is a delineation of papal authority from Jesus. Jesus tells Peter he will found his church on peters confession. It’s the confession not peter that gives the church it’s power. Paul and Peter hardly agreed apart from this confession. The splintering was immediate and good.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
“Indulgences simply remove the temporal punishment due for past sin . . ..”
I must search my Bible for the source of this teaching, having heretofore been trusting my God-granted faith in the Christ and His vicarious atonement to ensure my salvation, my daily sins, past and future, notwithstanding.
Every day I check Free Republic for its anti-catholic postings, doesn’t take long.
And isn’t this blog pimping? Posting your own blog?
When the church started to gentilize Christ and in turn gentilize the Jewish believers. Paul said that those who are circumcised let them remain circumcised. That’s when apostasy started creeping into the church. I read somewhere that Pope Benedict said if you met Jesus you have met Judaism. Unfortunately the Protestant participate to in the apostasy.
When? Do you think that devil waited even one day after Pentecost to start deceiving people about this ‘new and living way’?
He was no doubt using his usual tools of lies, pride, vanity, etc. to build his ‘true church’ within a few months or years of the initial pouring out of the Holy Ghost on Pentecost.
There were thousands of pilgrims there on that day, and probably many with second hand knowledge of the event (weren’t direct witness to it all, but were told in the streets about it). How many went back to their home country having the story inaccurate to varying degrees, and went about saying “I was THERE!”
I call those types of people ‘Ahimaaz messengers’.
Would any instance of teachers bypassing the instructions of the apostles qualify as apostacy? Most everyone familiar with Christianity knows Matt. 28:19, and accept it as being labeled ‘the Great Commision’, when actually, all of the Lord’s commission are great. Consider these other great commissions of the Lord to his disciples:
“Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Mark 16:15,16
“And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem”. Luke 24:47
“Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” John 20:23
And so in Jerusalem they began to preach. After which convicted hearts enquired: “..Men and brethern, what shall we do?” Then Peter said unto them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:37,38
Note that Peter commanded repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus FOR the remission of sins. HE DID NOT command eating the Lord’s supper for remission of sins.
So....did Peter get it wrong right from the start? No, he did exactly what the Lord’s commisions instructed.
Anything that differs from that is not the original teaching.
That is the problem with this argument right from the beginning. It just sets up a straw man. It assumes that the church as a human institution is Christ’s bride, rather than it being all those who truly believe. In Revelation, Jesus had different messages for different churches, and even where He found fault in the church overall, including that it allowed false doctrines which Jesus hates, He found believers in it who had remained faithful.
Only the Spirit of God can totally know a church, but as Jesus’ messages to the churches in Revelation show us, we can know the doctrines of churches and test whether or not they agree with God’s Word.
I was raised a Lutheran in a very Catholic area, and have a Catholic convert parent. I’ve been open to the Catholic Church because I only wanted to follow Lord Jesus in truth. Over a long time I’ve seen that I can’t accept much of essential Catholic doctrine because it twists or ignores God’s Word. For example, it calls Mary sinless and says it was necessary, for Jesus to be without sin (even though it was the Holy Spirit who placed Him in Mary’s womb, somehow) , for Mary to have been conceived without sin. It doesn’t explain how Mary, though, could be without sin if *her* parents weren’t. The Catholic belief on Jesus and Mary requires a sinless lineage going back to Adam and Eve themselves, and neither were sinless.