Jesus Christ And The Early Christian Church

http://www.jesuschristsavior.net/Church.html ^

[NKP_Vet]

The point of origin of the Christian faith is Jesus Christ.

This page reviews the transmission of the Christian faith from Jesus Christ and the Apostles through the Traditions of the early Christian Church and the formation of the Canon of the New Testament of the Bible.

God has revealed himself to man through Divine Revelation, by sending us his beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. God chose to reveal himself to us so that we may become partakers of his divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). God first made himself known by creating our first parents, Adam and Eve, in his image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-28). Following the Fall of Adam and Eve through original sin, God's promise of Redemption gave them the hope of salvation (Genesis 3:15). In preparing for the redemption of the human race, God made covenants with Noah, Abraham, Moses and the people and prophets of Israel. Salvation history is fulfilled through the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Word made Flesh.

Our appropriate personal response in our relationship with Christ Jesus is what St. Paul calls "the obedience of faith" (Romans 1:5, 16:26)!

There were three stages in the formation of the Gospels: the Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ, the Oral Tradition of the Apostles, and the Written Word.

[af_vet_1981]

So you and your Org disavow the seven Churches in Rev 2 &3. Magic Thinking can do anything you want.

It seems to me this comment is illogical, without basis in fact, and not an accurate reflection of my views.

The seven churches in Revelation were bona fide New Testament churches, as evidenced by the Messiah addressing them as such, and that they had candlesticks. The Messiah warned them because they belonged to Him, being part of the one holy catholic apostolic church. He wanted them to repent and do the works He commands. He wanted everyone with ears to hear to listen and obey.

The original Protestant faith communities, and the faith communities which have sprung up since in their wake after breaking up with them, have no such scriptural or historical provenance. They were created some five hundred years ago or more recently, without a prophet, without an apostle.

If the genuine churches be judged, where shall those communities which are not really genuine churches appear ? It seems reasonable to me to hold them to the same standards of works that the LORD Jesus Christ held His beloved churches in Revelation.

And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

...

For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

...

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Luke, Catholic chapter twelve, Protestant verses four to five,

First Peter, Catholic chapter four, Protestant verses seventeen to eighteen,

Revelation, Catholic chapter three, Protestant verses fourteen to twenty two,

as authorized, but not authored, by King James

[MHGinTN]

“... being part of the one holy catholic apostolic church.” You ignorance of HISTORY is now showing through your Org confusion.

[daniel1212]

No, not a sect, a church, one church that the gates of hell have not overcome.

The church was a sect, and its has persevered, despite Catholicism largely becoming as the gates of Hell for multitudes, for the only One True Church is that of the corporate body of Christ which always and only consists 100% of true believers, while the organic fellowships they are to gather together in inevitably become admixtures of wheat and tares.

God uses it nonetheless, just as He used governments, but the church of Rome is distinctively not the NT church, as shown , despite your assertions of propaganda.

There are some antiCatholics on these threads that have not accepted what you posted and still look to Jamnia for support. It is good you do not. Next time, I may ping you so you can correct them.

No problem. At least then your response would better warrant response. .

[editor-surveyor]

.
I repeat, nothing is about “Mary.”

The whole Bible is about the eternal Son of Yehova, Yeshua Ha Missiach.

You seem to love irrelevant rabbit trails.
.

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “Magic Thinking can do anything you want.” <<

But only if you have the magic decoder ring found at the bottom of a box of Constantine flakes.
.

[af_vet_1981]

The church was a sect, ...

AntiCatholicism is not Christianity and is a stumbling block in recognizing the Messiah in the one holy catholic apostolic church.

[ravenwolf]

I repeat, nothing is about “Mary.”...........
That is what the thread is about,( Mary )

You seem to love irrelevant rabbit trails............
No, mot really, i was just making a test to see how far a flea carrying prairie dog would go to come up to the status of a rabbit.

[MHGinTN]

You asserted, “ holy catholic apostolic church. “ The last Apostle was John. Your religious Org has not had an Apostle to turn to for more than 19 centuries ... and it shows, what with the fabricated Mary as a mediatrix, indulgences, purgatory, a priest hierarchy, etc.

[af_vet_1981]

You asserted, “ holy catholic apostolic church. “

One holy catholic apostolic church, from the days of the apostles until this day, continuing in every century with appointed bishops through the laying on of hands, an unbroken chain of faith and love, with the gates of hell not prevailing, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with the Messiah as the chief cornerstone.

[MHGinTN]

Um, the list of popes those supposed handoff bishops from the Apostles shows your assertion to be ridiculous.

[daniel1212]

AntiCatholicism is not Christianity and is a stumbling block in recognizing the Messiah in the one holy catholic apostolic church.

Rather, regardless of compelled assertions, rejection of antiCatholicism is not Christianity and is a stumbling block in recognizing the Messiah in the one holy catholic apostolic church, since it remains that Catholicism is the most manifest corruption of the NT church, with her distinctive not being manifest therein .

[MHGinTN]

Daniel has precisely refuted your absurd claim ...

There were no manifest apostolic successors voted for after Matthias was chosen for Judas (even though James was martyred: Acts 12:1,2), which was in order to maintain the foundational number of apostles (cf. Rv. 21:14) and which was by the non-political Scriptural means of casting lots. (cf. Prov. 16:33)

Furthermore, Rome's so-called apostolic successors fail of the qualifications and credentials of manifest Biblical apostles. (Acts 1:21,22; 1Cor. 9:1; Gal. 1:11,12; 2Cor. 6:4-10; 12:12)

Peter was the initial, non-assertive street-level leader among the 11, once even listed after James (who provided the conclusive judgment in Acts 15) in Gal. 2 as one of 3 present who appeared to be pillars. To whom Rome's ensured perpetual formulaic infallibility is nowhere promised, and in contrast holy (he was) Peter was the only apostle directly publicly rebuked.

•The absence of any succession for Peter or preparation for one is seen in the NT, an incongruous conspicuous omission for a cardinal doctrine, while ordination of leaders is described and taught. For the only continuously perpetuated pastoral office (unless deacons are included) by way of formal ordination was that of presbuteros (senior/elder) or episkopos (superintendent/overseer), both of which refer to those in the same office. (Titus 1:5-7)

• Nowhere is the church described as looking to Peter as the first of a line of supreme infallible heads in Rome, nor told to even in any of the church epistles or in the Lord's commendations and criticisms of the 7 churches of Asia.

• Nowhere interpretive of Mt. 16:18 is Peter called or described as the Rock upon which the church was built. Instead, that the LORD Jesus is the Rock (“petra”) or "stone" (“lithos,” and which denotes a large rock in Mk. 16:4) upon which the church is built is one of the most abundantly confirmed doctrines in the Bible (petra: Rm. 9:33; 1Cor. 10:4; 1Pet. 2:8; cf. Lk. 6:48; 1Cor. 3:11; lithos: Mat. 21:42; Mk.12:10-11; Lk. 20:17-18; Act. 4:11; Rm. 9:33; Eph. 2:20; cf. Dt. 32:4, Is. 28:16) including by Peter himself. (1Pt. 2:4-8)

• Nowhere is leadership/magisterial office promised ensured perpetual infallibility. RCs extrapolate support for this out of promises of God's presence and preservation, but which Israel has as well. They also hold that an infallible magisterium is essential to know what is of God (writing and men) and their meaning, but which was never required before, and is contrary to how the church began.

• Nowhere is leadership distinctively titled “hiereus” (priests), which distinctive title is only used for Jewish and pagan priests. Catholics try to defend the use of priests by relying on an etymological fallacy , since "priest," from old English "preost," etymologically is derived from "presbyteros," but which is not what the latter means. Instead the use of the title priests was a latter development due to imposed functional equivalence, supposing NT presbyteros engaged in a unique sacrificial ministry as a primary function, which they did not.

• Nowhere is leadership even shown distributing food as part of their specific ordained function, (Acts 6:3,4) and is nowhere is the Lords' Supper shown to be led by priests conducting it, let alone offering it as a sacrifice for sins to be consumed to obtain eternal life. The command to “do this in memory of Me” is nowhere shown to be specifically and uniquely given to leadership, let alone a class titled “priests.”

• The primary function of pastors was that of prayer and preaching the word of God, (Acts 6:3,4) which is said to "nourish" the souls of believers, and believing it is how the lost obtain life in themselves. (1 Timothy 4:6; Psalms 19:7;Acts 15:7-9)

• Nowhere is celibacy a requirement for leadership, as in contrast marriage was the norm for pastors, include most of the apostles. Paul and Barnabas under a vow to stay single. (1Cor. 9:4; 1Tim. 3:1-7)

IF you will read the material and check the Scriptures, as I have now done with this entry, you will see the absurdity of your claim. You won't disavow it because you are following Rome, not Christ, The Word of God.

[af_vet_1981]

Actually, in Hebrew the key words, for "my," are not there, thus it reads,

Original Word: אַשְׁמָה

וְאַשְׁמוֹתַי

The "he" in the root noun drops in favor the plural "vav" "tau" and "yodh" is added for first person possessive.

My sins

Similarly the "yodh" is added to the word for folly so it is first person possessive, my folly so this Psalm does have the Hebrew for "my" in the key words.

For example, תּוֹרָתִי‎ torati (my law) ( torah becomes torati )

[af_vet_1981]

Including Mrs. Don-o since the original point was hers (and correct).

Actually, in Hebrew the key words, for "my," are not there, thus it reads,

Original Word: אַשְׁמָה

וְאַשְׁמוֹתַי

The "he" in the root noun drops in favor the plural "vav" "tau" and "yodh" is added for first person possessive.

My sins

Similarly the "yodh" is added to the word for folly so it is first person possessive, my folly so this Psalm does have the Hebrew for "my" in the key words.

For example, תּוֹרָתִי‎ torati (my law) ( torah becomes torati )

[daniel1212]

The "he" in the root noun drops in favor the plural "vav" "tau" and "yodh" is added for first person possessive.

Fine, yet regardless of the warrant for "my," it remains that as said, "you cannot certainly get that the church of Rome is the supreme infallible deterministic authority on Truth" out of that text, regardless of how many double posts you make.