Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: StormPrepper

Really? You want to do this now?

What are you talking about the “people chose Linus”?? The very oldest source we have (Irenaeus, ca. 160-180) says that the Apostle Peter personally appointed Linus, Cletus, and Clement over the Roman Church. Clement who, by the way, may well be the Clement mentioned by Paul, and who in any case was written to by the Church in Ephesus to settle a conflict while the apostle John was perhaps still alive—interesting in itself.

Also, two Eastern bishops: Polycarp, who sat at the feet of St. John, and Ignatius who likely did as well, both went to Rome, and both spoke in glowing terms about the Roman Church. Neither had any notion that the leaders who followed Peter “were not of God” of Christ’s Real Church as you claim.

I dunno where your got your church history from, but you’ve been fed a lot of bad information.


58 posted on 02/25/2017 5:54:44 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: Claud

Sorry, Clement’s letter was to Corinth, not Ephesus.


59 posted on 02/25/2017 5:55:51 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

To: Claud
Really? You want to do this now?

Why not? It's a legitimate point.

What are you talking about the “people chose Linus”?? The very oldest source we have (Irenaeus, ca. 160-180) says that the Apostle Peter personally appointed Linus, Cletus, and Clement over the Roman Church.

Rome was not the leadership of Christ's Church. The Church had a congregation in Rome and Linus was a Bishop over that congregation. You're confusing today's definition of the Catholic church with the Christ's church organization. They no way close to being the same thing.

Bishops in the original church were responsible for their local congregations. And that was Linus' responsibility.

Also, two Eastern bishops: Polycarp, who sat at the feet of St. John, and Ignatius who likely did as well, both went to Rome, and both spoke in glowing terms about the Roman Church.

Again, Rome had a congregation. It was not the head of the Church. It wasn't the "Roman church", it was the congregation in Rome.

Neither had any notion that the leaders who followed Peter “were not of God” of Christ’s Real Church as you claim.

The Catholic church retrofitted those titles and positions in order to claim legitimacy. There was a Bishop in Ephesus and Corinth, etc... They were the leaders in there respective locations.

However, the leadership of the whole of Christ's Church remained with a Prophet who held the position of an Apostle. And that was John.

Linus could not be the leader of the Church because John was alive. And God proved that by speaking to John face to face.

Linus lead an apostasy movement that became the Catholic church. You are seeing the results today. That's why God doesn't and hasn't ever spoken to a Pope face to face.
62 posted on 02/25/2017 9:07:55 AM PST by StormPrepper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]

To: Claud
Also, two Eastern bishops: Polycarp, who sat at the feet of St. John, and Ignatius who likely did as well, both went to Rome, and both spoke in glowing terms about the Roman Church.

Naw...PolyCarp may have looked favorably on the church at Rome like he did the church at Jerusalem and Corinth, but Roman Church??? PolyCarp??? Now there's some real perversion of history...

65 posted on 02/25/2017 11:34:12 AM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | 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