So if Christ founded the catholic church then..........all these wicked and immoral popes are of God?All these inquistions and crusades? I can't accept that.
And I don't. Because the early church did not teach catholicism.
You shall have no other gods before me. “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me "Exodus 20:3-5" Mary don't Perform miracles nor blesses us only God Does
@44BigBoii BLESSED VIRGIN MARY Mary Lk 1:28, 30 - angel:"full of grace, found favor with God Lk 1:42 - Elizabeth:"most blessed among women" Lk 1:48 - Mary: "all generations will call me blessed" Statues *Ex 20:4-5 - do not make and worship any graven images Ex 25:18-19 - make two cherubim of beaten gold Num 21:8-9 - Moses made bronze serpent & put on pole 1Kgs 6:23-29 - temple had engraved cherubim, trees, flowers 1Kgs 7:25-45 - temple had bronze oxen, lions, pomegranates
xtians rape kids . always in news. mathew 27;51 says loads of corpses came alive same time as jesus yet no1 has evr heard about it. this is biggest thing in any bible huge world news. no1 says owt about it. u cnt die twice so wer arw these corpses now then . did they 1st go home now wer are they. see bible makes up stories but wen u think about them u see its rubbish
The truth is that SDAs do not honor the Sabbath according to the Jewish anyway.
It's MUCH more than just going to church on Saturday. SDAs, to honor it as the Jews did, among the activities prohibited is cooking and baking - and that includes restaurants - you'd be forcing others to do the work. Are you preparing your meals for Saturday before sunset tonite? Another - igniting a fire - I hope you don't live in a cold climate - no furnace tonite for you. Writing - no YT comments 4U tonite!
I don't hate Catholics. I love all people. I just know truth. I read the Bread of Life (Holly Bible NKJV, KJV, NIV ect.) I study for myself as the Bible tells you to.
Your praying to the wrong God. Satan Has had Thousands of years to perfect his evil craft. It's a shame when sinners think they have go through men to be forgiven their sins when truly all they have to do is cry out to Jesus. A time will come when there will be a religion. The Caths. will return to their haritage of the the middle ages and before. They have murdered millions for not conforming to them. Look up the Waldensians and the Jewish Christians for example. Look to the Great I AM
Any church that believes their leader (the Pope (Papacy)) on Earth is of equal divinity or any level of divinty as such as Jesus had on Earth and in Heaven is the Beast and bears the mark of it. Look to the LITTLE HORN from Danial chapt. 8 and look to Revalation chpt. 13 seriously study hard your souls depend on it. Caths changed the Sabbath and admit it. Look in thier books. Only God can change Times and Laws and he didn't. He is the same before now and always the everlasting GREAT I AM!
@craventref HAIL CONSTANTINE HAIL CONSTANTINE the father and founder of the satanic roman catolic sect in the yr 313, and dont forget that constantine built the basilica of st peter
As a matter of fact all the disciples of Christ died horrible deaths accept the Disciple John which died on the Island of Patmos of old age after writing the Revelation of Jesus Christ, oh and by the way he lived through the Romans boiling him in oil before he was sent to Patmos.
Lets Not forget that the same Catholics were born from the old dying Roman Empire around the time of Constantine who change the Lords 4th Commandment which states Remember the Sabbath day to keep it Holy, to the day of the Sun which is Sunday which makes that a pagan religion because he worshiped the Sun as most of the Romans at that time did.
The 4th Commandment reads Remember at the beginning for a reason, because the Great I AM knew the little horn (read and study patiently Danial chapt.8 as well as Revelation) would come along to change time and laws.
No where in the Bible does it state the Sabbath was ever changed to Sunday or any other day. Yes we should worship every day, but in the beginning God set aside the Seventh Day as a day of rest for us after completing the Earth on the 6th day to spend time with him
(for proof of the 7th day Sabbath check your calendars and see when the first day of the week is and count from the first day to the last and you will see that the true Sabbath is Friday sundown to Saturday sundown and for those who do not know the lord counts days from sundown to sundown Read your Holy Bibles NKJV, KJV, NIV, ect.).
All people of this world need to taste the Bread of Life every day that is the true Holy Bible not the Bible the Catholics say the Holy Spirit inspired THEM to write.
They admit they changed times and laws during Constantine's reign look it up know your history. Study for yourselves for the Truth and the Word will set you free.
The picture at 2.47 mins blew me away.Look at the baby boy reaching out and touching Bld Pope John Paul II's face. Look into his eyes. Can you see the connection? Can see the flow of love? It looks like as if he is trying to say something.Look at his mother. Look at her eyes turned with tenderness to her child. Doesn't it look like Mother Mary carrying Jesus?The icon of Mary is always portrayed this way. Why? She is always telling us to focus our attention on Jesus and do what He says, not Her.
Roman Catholic Church the only 1 true church found by jesus christ, i'm catholic, i'm very strong in my faith. Proud to be a catholic..I pray that 1 day the whole world will see the truth and follow the true faith, the catholic faith...Amen.
@tonganfoilole69 the Roman Catholic Church is not the only church founded by christ... there were five.. which were called the Pentarchy, the Churches in the Jerusalem, Antioquia, Alexandria, Constantinople and the Rome.
@kiryllangelo Early Father Irenaeus, (succession of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition.)This was just part of the letter. You see everything was to be delegated from Rome, meaning Rome had the head Authority. we know Peter was all these Different places, but when he left, he left and ended up in Rome.
@tonganfoilole69 HAIL CONSTANTINE HAIL CONSTANTINE the father and founder of the satanic roman catolic sect in the yr 313, and dont forget that constantine built the basilica of st peter
We don't deny it, because He is indeed the "Solid Rock", the "Chief Cornerstone and foundation" and because He is Holy One.
But in this case, it is very clear Christ was talking to Simon and naming him "Cephas" which means rock and giving him the keys to His Kingdom and so on.
According to Origen, Peter was crucified head downwards, by his own request because he considered himself unworthy to die in the same manner as Christ.[13] The crucifixion took place near an ancient Egyptian obelisk in the Circus of Nero.[14] The obelisk now stands in Saint Peter's Square and is revered as a "witness" to Peter's death. It is one of several ancient Obelisks of Rome.
The name Peter is "Petrus" in Latin and "Petros" in Greek, deriving from "petra" which means "stone" or "rock" in Greek.
It is believed by a long tradition that Peter, after a ministry of about thirty years, traveled to Rome and met his martyrdom there in the year 64 AD during the reign of the Roman Emperor Nero. His execution was one of the many martyrdoms of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome.
@dodge0808 Peace of Our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.Here is your brother in Faith who share the same DNA of Baptism and Confirmation as you. I'll thank God for you for doing a great job in His harvest. We need people like you to shine light into the darkness of ignorance, falsehood and lies which will lead to the loss souls. S.O.S.(Save Our Souls) many are crying out but are refusing to stretch out their hands to grasp on to the TRUTH . How sad. May I use you comments for my posts? Yrs in JMJ.
Regarding Peter was there in Rome. Didn't you read the history?
After the crucifixion of Jesus in the second quarter of the 1st century AD, it is recorded in the Biblical book of the Acts of the Apostles that one of his twelve disciples, Simon known as Peter, a fisherman from Galilee, took a leadership position among Jesus' followers and was of great importance in the founding of the Christian Church.
For the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as "the principle without principle," (read Council of Florence (1442): DS 1331), is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, He is with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds. See Cf. Council of Lyons II (1274): DS 850.
At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father's character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he "who proceeds from the Father," it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son.
Whereas the Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
It says this, "legitimately and with good reason," (see Council of Florence 1439:DS 1302)
Post # 13 From the beginning this acknowledgment of Christ's divine sonship will be the center of the apostolic faith, first professed by Peter as the Church's foundation.
@dodge0808 Again, like I had stated before. it is the way certain verses in Scriptures are being interpreted to justify one's position. Jesus will build His Church upon a person's profession of faith in Him as the Christ. Catholic apologists want the "rock" to be Peter. St. Paul in I Corinthians 3:11, that "Christ is the Rock".The keys of the kingdom refers to a special authority that will be given to both Peter and the other Apostles.
Post # 12 Similarly Paul will write, regarding his conversion on the road to Damascus, "When he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles..." "And in the synagogues immediately [Paul] proclaimed Jesus, saying, 'He is the Son of God.'"
Post # 11 Such is not the case for Simon Peter when he confesses Jesus as "the Christ, the Son of the living God", for Jesus responds solemnly: "Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven."
Post # 10 The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock (read John 21:15-17).
"The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head." This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church's very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.
He even identified himself with the Temple by presenting himself as God's definitive dwelling-place among men. Therefore his being put to bodily death presaged the destruction of the Temple, which would manifest the dawning of a new age in the history of salvation: "The hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father."
Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it. Far from having been hostile to the Temple, where he gave the essential part of his teaching, Jesus was willing to pay the Temple-tax, associating with him Peter, whom he had just made the foundation of his future Church.
Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had confessed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Our Lord then declared to him: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." Christ, the "living Stone", thus assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death.
19] "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
This document will discuss the nature of this authority, which is the basis for not only the Papacy, but for Apostolic Succession itself.
Matthew 16:18 says;"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. "
You quoted: "St. Peter was the "voice of the Apostles, but nowhere in Scriptures does have authority or mastery over the Apostles."
Wrong! Why? Because the Scirptures affirms that the Catholic Church teaches the Biblical account of the foundation of the Church, by Christ, on Peter. Peter is given a specific authority, as are the other Apostles.
@dodge0808 You go into a big discussion about the Holy Trinity, but never confront the issue and addition of the filioque.
The foundation of the Church is Jesus Christ. There is nothing in scriptures that suggest that the "Church" is built on just one of the Apostles. All the Apostles are given specific authority from Christ. In Scriptures St. Paul played a more important role in the life of the assembly in Rome.
"You go into a big discussion about the Holy Trinity, but never confront the issue and the addition of filioque."
I have one word, like I've said, I'll give you a thorough discussion. Please read my posts 10 to 15.
More so, the introduction of filioque into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed by the Latin liturgy constitutes moreover, even today, a point of disagreement with the Orthodox Churches.
To early writers like Clement of Rome (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107), and Irenaeus (c. 180) it was common knowledge that he worked and died in Rome."
And, all this points to the theory that Peter was writing from Rome, which is supported by the evidence of Tertullian (praescrip haeret, 36) and Eusebius (Eccl History, 2.25.8; 2.15.2 and 3.1.
It seems certain that Peter spent his closing years in Rome. Although the New Testamentnt about such a stay, it is supported by 1 Peter 5:13, where 'BABYLON' is a code-name for "Rome", and by the strong case for linking the Gospel of Mark, who as Peter's companion (1 Pet 5:13) is said to have derived its substance from him, with Rome.
The affirmation of the filioque does not appear in the Creed confessed in 381 at Constantinople. But Pope St. Leo I, following an ancient Latin and Alexandrian tradition, had already confessed it dogmatically in 447 (see cf. Leo I, Quam laudabiliter (447): DS 284), even before Rome, in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, came to recognize and receive the Symbol of 381.
The use of this formula is the Creed was gradullay admitted into the Latin liturgy (between the 8th & 11th cent.)
@dodge0808 The addition of the filioque in the west goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. Rome committed an error by the addition. No justification can dismiss that fact.
You quoted: The addition of the filioque in the west goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. Rome committed an error by the addition. No justification can dismiss that fact."
It is easy for you to give a conclusion my friend. Ecumenical Councils are the norm for developing doctrine, but, at this point, I have to ask for clarification, for two questions only: 1. How is a council determined to be Ecumenical by the Orthodox?
And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom He is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. ( Council of Florence (1439): DS 1300-1301.)
The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)."
The Council of Florence in 1438 explains:"The Holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son; He has in nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration.
One and equal with the Father and the Son, "of the same substance and also of the same nature."
Yet he is not called the Spirit of the Father alone, but the Spirit of both the Father and the Son." (Council of Toledo XI (675): DS 527).
The Creed of the Church from the Council of Constantinople confesses: "With the Father and the Son, He is worshipped and glorified." (Nicene Creed; cf. DS 150).
The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was confessed by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381): "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who procceds from the Father." (Nicene Creed; cf DS 150).
Father as "the source and origin of the whole divinity." (Council of Toledo VI (638): DS 490). But the eternal origin of the Spirit is not unconnected with the Son's origin: "the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity is God,...
The eternal origin of the Holy Spirit is revealed in His mission in time. The Spirit is sent to the apostles and to the Church both by the Father in the name of the Son, and by the Son in person, once He had returned to the Father. (Read John 14:26; 15:26 and 16:14)
That is, the sending of the person of the Spirit after Jesus' glorification (see John 7:39), reveals in its fullness the mystery of the Holy Trinity.
We believe, the Father and the Son revealed by the Holy Spirit.
Before His Passoever, Jesus announced the sending of "another Paraclete" (Advocate), the Holy Spirit.
At work since creation, having previously "spoken through the prophets," the Spirit will now be with and in the disciples, to teach them and guide them "into all the truth." (Read Gen. 1:2, John 14:17, 26, 16:13)
The Holy Spirit is thus revealed as another divine person with Jesus and the Father.
Following this apostolic tradition, the Church confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicea (325) that the Son is "consubstantial" with the Father, that is, one only God with Him.
The second ecumenical council, held at Constantinople in 381, kept this expression in its formulation of the Nicene Creed and confessed "the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father."
Who is eternally Son only in relation to His Father:"No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal Hiom." (Read Mt. 11:27)
For this reason the apostles confess Jesus to be the Word: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" as "the image of the invisible God"; "as the radiance of the glory of God and the very stamp of His nature." John 1:1, Col 1:15, Heb.1:3
So, by calling God "Father," the language of faith indicates two main things: 1) that God is the first origin of everything and transcendent authority; 2) and the He is at the same time goodness and loving care for all His children.
Regarding the Son, Jesus revealed that God is the Father in an unheard-of sense: He is Father not only in being Creator; He is eternally Father in relation to His only Son.
To be sure, God has left traces of His Trinitarian being in His work of creation and in His Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But His inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.
The deity is often considered the "father of gods and of men."
In Israel, God is called "Father" inasmuch as He is Creator of the world.
Through the economy the theology is revealed to us; but conversely, the theology illuminates the whole economy.
God's works reveal who He is in Himself; the mystery of His most being enlightens our understanding of all His works.
So it is, analogously, among human persons.
The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God." (See Dei Filius 4:DS 3015)
3)And, how, by the divine missions of the Son and the Holy Spirit, God the Father fulfills the "plan of His loving goodness" of creation, redemption, and sanctification.
The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology and economy.
"Theology" refers to the mystery of God's inmost life within the Blessed Trinity and "economy" to all the works by which God reveals Himself and communicates His life.
The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, reveals Himself to men "and reconciles and unites with Himself those who turn aways from sin."
This paragraph expounds briefly :
1) How the mystery of the Blessed Trinity was revealed.
2) How the Church has articulated the doctrine of the faith regarding this mystery.
@dodge0808 The verb "shall send" is in the future, expressing something that will happen in the future. In the "procession" the "centre" is the Father, in the "mission" it is the Son. The procession happens fo the Holy Trinity, the mission for the world. The "procession" happens outside of time, the "mission' within time. It seems the Western Church is confusing the "procession" with the "mission". The filioque places the Holy Spirit in a state of subordination to the Father and the Son,.
Thank you for the reply. Let me explain to you point by point.
The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in Himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them.
It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the "heirarchy of the truths of faith.'
@dodge0808 The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent into the world by the Son. Each Person of the Holy Trinity has His own characteristics. The Father is "unbegotten", Christ is " begotten:". He is born eternally from the Father. The Holy Spirit "Proceeds" eternally from the Father. The verb "proceeds" is in the present tense and expresses the eternal continuous procession of the Holy Spirit.
@dodge0808 The Orthodox have, since the early Church, given Communion under both species, bread(leavened) and wine. The Catholics changed this after the split from the East in 1054. Catholics just use unleavened bread.
Now the filioque. This addition is heretical. The addition goes against the decisions of the Second,Third, and Fourth Ecumenical Councils, which confirmed the trueness of the Symbol of Faith.
@dodge0808 The dogma of the Immaculate Conception, defined in 1854, is rejected by the Orthodox because of the erroneous understanding of original sin underlying it. By saying that Mary was free from original sin, the Catholics are saying that Mary was not mortal. The Orthodox calls Mary, "the first of the redeemed:" the first human to receive the great blessing of salvation now available to mankind.
@dodge0808 Christ made a complete sacrifice for ou sins, once we are forgiven ,we are forgiven.There is no need to provide explanation for some "residual" debt which remains after one is forgiven. The "intermediate state" in Orthodox theology, is not a state between heaven and hell in which some souls must spend time before entering heaven, but a state of repose where all souls rest in anticipation of the Last Judgement.
@dodge0808 There are many other differences and practices between the current Catholic Mass and the Orthodox Liturgy. Fasting is regularly adhered to, while the Catholics have changed this.
Orthodoxy avoids understanding salvation in legalistic terms. The idea of purgatory is based on an obviously legalistic notion that the soul "must pay what owes", before being admitted to the full joys of heaven.
@dodge0808 When was St. Peter actually in Rome and for how long? I cannot get a straight answer and historians are still arguing the point. St. Peter was the "voice" of the Apostles, but nowhere in Scriptures does He have authority or mastery over the Apostles. Catholic apologists use certain verses in Scripture to justify the Petrine issue. Their interpretations are carved in stone, and I find it a waste of time to ague over this issue and their interpretations.
You asked: When was Peter actually in Rome and for how long?
The Scripture said so: 1 Peter 5:12-14,"Silvanus, our faithful brother as I consider him, I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God in which you stand. She who is in BABYLON, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ Jesus. Amen."
@dodge0808 Orthodox consider Rome, "first amongst equals", but reject the doctrine of Papal infallibility. This was an innovation that had no precedent in the early Church. It was formulated as a theological justification for the political power which historical circumstances had confirmed upon the Church.
The Apostle Peter was not bishop, but an Apostle. Apostle Paul was in Rome prior to Peter and Apostle Paul appointed Linus as the first bishop of Rome.
In addition with that, I am certained there were a number of good and holy men filling the office during these centuries, but to imply that the seat of the Bishop of Rome is empty while the Orthodox maintained Apostolic succession seems disengenuous to me.
Yes, in the 11th century there was a political schism between the East and West parts of the Church. There were liturgical differences only.
The faith remained the same, though the names changed. The West called "Roman Catholic (One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church)" and the East "Orthodox."
There are over twenty Orthodox Rites which returned in full to the Catholic Church, and there are talks know how the entire East coming back.
@dodge0808 The causes of the split were the addition of the filoque, and papal infallibility and authority. Both Churches prior to the split were Catholic and Apostolic.
@dodge0808 T he word "catholic" meaning universal/whole, not Roman. The filioque changed the theology of the Holy Trinity and is a deviation from Orthodox truth. This changed the teaching of the procession. The Roman Church violated the decree of the Third and subsequent Ecumenical Councils, which forbade the introduction of any kind of change into the Nicene Creed.
@rizalbalagtas You are missing the point.The Orthodox Church is both Catholic and Apostolic. This defined the early Church. The Orthodox have kept those teachings and traditions of "orthodoxy", while the Roman Church has added new dogmas and theology foreign to the early Church, such as Papal infallibility, the filioque addition,the dogmas of purgatory and the immaculate conception, etc.
@rizalbalagtas All I am saying is that the Orthodox have not added dogmas or changed theology like Rome has. I have already listed some of the additions: the filioque, Papal infallibility, immaculate conception and purgatory.
I am neither optimistic or the reverse. I did address once the doctrinal issues, however, these differences existed and thus, the reason that doctrines needed to be defined and articulated.
This was the issue as Christianity developed. It is easy to sit back in 2010 and view these issues through rose colored glassed.
As a matter of fact, many of the differences between East and West developed after the Schism.
Granted, Orthodox Christians do not believe in a Pope, but they most definitely agree with the Western Patriarch, the Bishop of Rome, as a first among equals.
@rizalbalagtasHAIL CONSTANTINE HAIL CONSTANTINE ,the father and founder of the satanic roman catolic sect in the yr 313 , and dont forget that constantine built the basiclica of st peter
@rizalbalagtas It was a complete division. The Orthodox consider the Catholic Sacraments as being invalid. You better research history, it was Rome that separated from the Eastern Orthodox. In AD1054, Roman legates travelled to Cerularius to deny him the title Ecumenical Patriarch and to insist that he recognize the Church of Rome's claim to be the head and mother of the churches. Cerularius refused. Cardinal Humbert, leader of the Latin contingent, excommunicated Cerularius ( the Orthodox)..
in 3 john 1:9-10 clearly says> I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us. 10So if I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us. Not satisfied with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.
The true Church founded by Christ on Pentecost ,AD33, is the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox have not deviated from the traditions or dogma of the early Church. The 4 Orthodox Patriarchates can historically trace back to an original 12 Apostles of Christ.
@rizalbalagtas What documentation are you seeking? The Christian Church was started in the eastern part of the empire. The entire early Church was both "catholic and apostolic", and "orthodox" in doctrine. When Rome separated from the east in AD1054, the other four Patriarchates, Jerusalem, Constantinople,, Antioch and Alexandria, kept the "orthodox" doctrines and traditions of the early Church. Rome was deviating from these teachings.
i pointed the writing of st. ignatius of antioch> where there is Christ Jesus there is catholic church.
yes Jesus founded only one Church, and when it began, it was fully united.
and we know about the great schism or divide between the East and West happened in 1054 when Pope Leo IX and Eastern Patriarch Michael I excommunicated each other.
@rizalbalagtas The West's addition of the filioque changes the theology of the Holy Trinity and went against the decision of the Second, Third and Fourth Ecumenical Councils. The Orthodox reject the Catholic dogmas of purgatory, Immaculate Conception and original sin. The Orthodox have, since the early Church, given Communion under both species, bread(leavened) and wine. Rome changed this after the split. The main obstacle is Papal primacy. Rome needs to return to the apostolic traditions.
the famous case, long afterwards, of the Decree of Florence and the forms kath on tropon, quemadmodum, shows how much confusion the use of two languages may cause.
these causes then combined to produce two halves of Christendom, an Eastern and a Western half, each distinguished in various ways from the other.
they are certainly not sufficient to account for a separation of those halves; only we notice that already there was a consciousness of two entities, the first marking of a line of division, through which rivalry, jealousy, hatred might easily cut a separation.
the causes of this are the rivalry and hatred arose from several causes. undoubtedly the first, the root of all the quarrel, was the advance of the See of Constantinople.
in this deplorable story we notice the following points. It is easier to understand how a schism continues than how it began.
schisms are easily made; they are enormously difficult to heal. the religious instinct is always conservative; there is always a strong tendency to continue the existing state of things. At first the schismatics were reckless innovators; then with the lapse of centuries their cause seems to be the old one; it is the Faith of the Fathers.
there is not really any question of doctrine involved. it is not a heresy, but a schism. the Decree of Florence made every possible concession to their feelings.
and there is no real reason why they should not sign that Decree now.
@rizalbalagtas The main causes of the Schism of AD1054, were Papal authority and the filioque addition. With regards to the Council of Florence, the Orthodox would have had to accept the innovations made by Rome, Papal authority, purgatory,the Latin teaching of the consecration of the Holy Gifts,the filioque addition and others.This Council was rejected, and those Orthodox delegates that signed it were subsequently defrocked.
well from the time of Diotrephes (3 john 1:9-10) there have been continual schisms, of which the greater number were in the East. Arianism produced a huge schism; the Nestorian and Monophysite schisms still last.
however, the Eastern Schism always means that most deplorable quarrel of which the final result is the separation of the vast majority of Eastern Christians from union with the Catholic Church, the schism that produced the separated, so-called Orthodox Church.
@rizalbalagtas I am Orthodox. Just need some clarification, what do you mean so-called Orthodox Church? It was Rome who separated from the Eastern Christians.
the Orthodox split the Church that's why it's called THE GREAT SCHISM.
i'm catholic, although i respect Orthodox as bothers and sisters in Christ.
my beliefs are that true Catholic and Orthodox Christians, but it depends on the Protestant or Anglicans are saved. because although Catholicism and Orthodox are considered different Churches they are not completely torn apart.
@rizalbalagtas i agree with you. i'm from Iraq and we know that the orthadox church broke away from the Catholic church but we can say that they did not completely throw away the teachings but they're just some-apart,like the Assyrian Catholic Church of the East.they broke apart of some other reasons, like racial identity between about if Chaldeans are Assyrians or are Assyrians teaching of St. Thomas still Catholic-like and so on. but the those churches still recognizes the councils. God bless
there is only one church whom Jesus himself established through the rock(Peter)
and that is the Roman Catholic Church.,
the one
Holy and Apostolic Church of Christ!!!
the gates of hell would not prevail against it.,
the Church survived several attacks from her earthly tyrants faced several threat from the non believers suffered from a series divisions and schisms.,
but yet she s still standing strongly for Christ is always in his Church
ang pag-unay awayay sa mga nagkadaiyang born against, pruyba lang nga sila sama sa ginagharian ni satanas nga gaunay away sumala sa giingon ni Hesus. Pila na ba ka grupo ang mga born again karon nga adunay nagkasumpaki nga mga pagtulon-an ug doktrina? example: Quiboly vs. Jackhunter (Baptist), etc.
sabi ng hindi Christian si Joel osteen hanapin mo sa youtube discussion between Joel Osteen(false Christian) and Paul Washer(True Christian) sabi ko sa inyo noon na marami ang nag papakilala na sila daw ay born again like sugo ni Quiboloy.... gets mo??
musta jackie... nakaka miss din ang youtube... ang mga salita ni jesus regarding interdenominationalism ay akmang-akma sa mga born against christians.
Apan si Jesus nga nasayod sa ilang hunahuna miingon: Ang gingharian nga magkabahinbahin ug mag-unay, mapukan. Ang lungsod o pani-malay nga magkabahinbahin dili molungtad. Kon ang usa ka yawa moabog sa lain, nabahinbahin siya batok sa kaugalingon. Unsaon pagba-rog sa iyang gingharian? - Mt. 12:25-26
there is no teaching of the catholic contradic to its doctrine well in fact we the catholics are the owner of that bible. you have. the catholic church produce the bible and not the bilble produce our church.
2Pedro 3:15 Ug isipa ninyong kaluwasan ang pagkamainantuson sa Ginoo. Sa ingon usab niini ang atong hinigugmang igsoon nga si Pablo nagsulat kaninyo sumala sa kaalam nga gihatag kaniya,
16 nga nagsulti mahitungod niini sumala sa iyang ginahimo sa tanan niyang mga sulat; nga sa maong mga sulat aduna ganiy mga butang nga malisud sabton, nga GINATUIS SA MGA WALAY ALAMAG ug sa mga mabalhinon ug kinaiya, ingon sa GINABUHAT USAB NILA SA UBANG KASULATAN SA PAGTUIS NIINI
dearator you want verse na SWAK NA SWAK sa inyong Church ug mga teachings??? huh??? mao nay gi ingon na pataka lang ka ug sulti kanang PSTR. nga si Joel Osten daw ay AGAINST ang kanyang turo sa aming faith in other words yung mga rapist na sinasabi mo ay
hindi namin yan kapapanampaltaya kasi iba ang kanilang doctrine.. kya wag mong ipilit hahahaha
2Pedro 2:17 Kini sila maoy mga tuboran nga walay tubig, ug mga gabon nga pinalid sa unos; alang kanila gitagana ang labing mangiob nga kangitngit.
18 Kay sa magalitok silag mga pinaburot nga kakawangan, pinaagi sa maulagon nga mga PANGIBOG SA LAWAS, ilang ginahaylo ang mga tawo nga bag-o pa lamang nga nga nanagpakaikyas gikan kanila nga nagakinabuhi sa kasaypanan.
pag human nilag dani sa mga chikay ilahang rapepon... SATANIC PRIEST hehehe...
2Pedro 2:3 ¶ Ug tungod sa ilang kadalo kamo ilang panapion pinaagi sa tinumotomo nga mga pulong; sukad pa kaniadto sa karaan ang hukom kanila sa silot wala maghunong, ug ang ilang pagkalaglag wala magkatulog.
4 Kay kon ang mga manulonda wala kaloy-i sa Dios sa diha nga nakasala sila, hinonoa iyang gitambog sila ngadto sa infierno ug gibalhog ngadto sa mga lungib nga mangiob aron igatagana hangtud sa pagpanghukom;
UTOT nimo dearator dili jud ko maminaw sa inyong mga debater og mga preacher ninyo dearator....! sukwahi....! og pataka lang ug sulti hehehehe naa daw LIMBO matud pa sa Catholic teacher... pero ilahang gitago-an ang maong Satanic na pagtolun-an.... hahahaha
kung pangutan-on taka dearator... nakakakita o narinig mo na ba ang tinig ng Diyos??? ang sagot ni dearator ay WALA!
mga supernatural experiences dearator na ka experience ka na ba?? sagot ni dearator ay WALA!
kung mao kana basin mo ingon si God sa imo dearator kinsa ka?? wala ko makaila sa imo pahawa kamong namumuhat og daotan! luhod og rebulto og uban pang butang na wala nila hisabti....! weheheheheyyyy.....
Tin-aw kaayo dearator na kamo ang nasa hula ng Daniel.... na ang sabi ay: ang LAW ni GOD ay e change... ug mabasa pud nato sa Revelation daghan kaayo mga hula ang mga prophet na swak na swak sa inyo.... ang maong verse na Mateo 13:14-15 ay para na sa inyoha.... ngano? kay dili man gani ka ka dungog sa tingog sa Ginoo... ang mga taong hangal ay hindi makakakita sa mukha ng Diyos at hindi sila pinapakitaan ng mga vision... gara-a pud nimo dearator noh??
So if Christ founded the catholic church then..........all these wicked and immoral popes are of God?All these inquistions and crusades? I can't accept that.
And I don't. Because the early church did not teach catholicism.
hortulanus94 4 weeks ago
Visit us w w w. catolicosfirmesensufe . org
caparrav 1 month ago
You shall have no other gods before me. “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me "Exodus 20:3-5" Mary don't Perform miracles nor blesses us only God Does
44BigBoii 1 month ago
craventref 1 month ago
xtians rape kids . always in news. mathew 27;51 says loads of corpses came alive same time as jesus yet no1 has evr heard about it. this is biggest thing in any bible huge world news. no1 says owt about it. u cnt die twice so wer arw these corpses now then . did they 1st go home now wer are they. see bible makes up stories but wen u think about them u see its rubbish
mrlogicalman1 1 month ago
This SDA 7thdayable has been busy spamming a load of Catholics with his drivel today.
Hey, when's the next end of the world date according to your cult?
For a good read on WHY we worship on Sunday, google "Seventh Day Adventism Renounced". It's by a former SDA elder of over 20 years.
182RG 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The truth is that SDAs do not honor the Sabbath according to the Jewish anyway.
It's MUCH more than just going to church on Saturday. SDAs, to honor it as the Jews did, among the activities prohibited is cooking and baking - and that includes restaurants - you'd be forcing others to do the work. Are you preparing your meals for Saturday before sunset tonite? Another - igniting a fire - I hope you don't live in a cold climate - no furnace tonite for you. Writing - no YT comments 4U tonite!
182RG 1 month ago
By the way the Circus Of Nero is also known as the Thrown of Satan. See all my comments below as well.
7thdayable 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't hate Catholics. I love all people. I just know truth. I read the Bread of Life (Holly Bible NKJV, KJV, NIV ect.) I study for myself as the Bible tells you to.
7thdayable 1 month ago
Your praying to the wrong God. Satan Has had Thousands of years to perfect his evil craft. It's a shame when sinners think they have go through men to be forgiven their sins when truly all they have to do is cry out to Jesus. A time will come when there will be a religion. The Caths. will return to their haritage of the the middle ages and before. They have murdered millions for not conforming to them. Look up the Waldensians and the Jewish Christians for example. Look to the Great I AM
7thdayable 1 month ago
Comment removed
craventref 1 month ago
@7thdayable what millions are you talking about silly head?
craventref 1 month ago
@7thdayable 7day are the craziest cults.
craventref 1 month ago
Any church that believes their leader (the Pope (Papacy)) on Earth is of equal divinity or any level of divinty as such as Jesus had on Earth and in Heaven is the Beast and bears the mark of it. Look to the LITTLE HORN from Danial chapt. 8 and look to Revalation chpt. 13 seriously study hard your souls depend on it. Caths changed the Sabbath and admit it. Look in thier books. Only God can change Times and Laws and he didn't. He is the same before now and always the everlasting GREAT I AM!
7thdayable 1 month ago
Lets start with the first thing: Peter was not a Pope. He was a Disciple of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ he died a martyrs death.
--cont.below--
7thdayable 1 month ago
@7thdayable PAPACY & APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
Mt 16:18 - upon this rock (Peter) I will build my church
Mt 16;19 - give you keys of the kingdom; power to bind & loose
Lk 22:32 - Peter's faith will strengthen his brethren
Jn 21:17 - given Christ's flock as chief shepherd
Mk 16:7 - angel sent to announce Resurrection to Peter
Lk 24:34 - risen Jesus first appeared to Peter
Acts 1:13-26 - headed meeting which elected Matthias
Acts 8:21 - excommunicated first heretic, Simon Magnus
craventref 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@craventref HAIL CONSTANTINE HAIL CONSTANTINE the father and founder of the satanic roman catolic sect in the yr 313, and dont forget that constantine built the basilica of st peter
hamlets7 1 month ago
As a matter of fact all the disciples of Christ died horrible deaths accept the Disciple John which died on the Island of Patmos of old age after writing the Revelation of Jesus Christ, oh and by the way he lived through the Romans boiling him in oil before he was sent to Patmos.
--cont.below--
7thdayable 1 month ago
Lets Not forget that the same Catholics were born from the old dying Roman Empire around the time of Constantine who change the Lords 4th Commandment which states Remember the Sabbath day to keep it Holy, to the day of the Sun which is Sunday which makes that a pagan religion because he worshiped the Sun as most of the Romans at that time did.
--cont.below--
7thdayable 1 month ago
The 4th Commandment reads Remember at the beginning for a reason, because the Great I AM knew the little horn (read and study patiently Danial chapt.8 as well as Revelation) would come along to change time and laws.
--cont.below--
7thdayable 1 month ago
No where in the Bible does it state the Sabbath was ever changed to Sunday or any other day. Yes we should worship every day, but in the beginning God set aside the Seventh Day as a day of rest for us after completing the Earth on the 6th day to spend time with him
--cont.below-
7thdayable 1 month ago
(for proof of the 7th day Sabbath check your calendars and see when the first day of the week is and count from the first day to the last and you will see that the true Sabbath is Friday sundown to Saturday sundown and for those who do not know the lord counts days from sundown to sundown Read your Holy Bibles NKJV, KJV, NIV, ect.).
-cont.below-
7thdayable 1 month ago
All people of this world need to taste the Bread of Life every day that is the true Holy Bible not the Bible the Catholics say the Holy Spirit inspired THEM to write.
-cont.below-
7thdayable 1 month ago
They admit they changed times and laws during Constantine's reign look it up know your history. Study for yourselves for the Truth and the Word will set you free.
7thdayable 1 month ago
The picture at 2.47 mins blew me away.Look at the baby boy reaching out and touching Bld Pope John Paul II's face. Look into his eyes. Can you see the connection? Can see the flow of love? It looks like as if he is trying to say something.Look at his mother. Look at her eyes turned with tenderness to her child. Doesn't it look like Mother Mary carrying Jesus?The icon of Mary is always portrayed this way. Why? She is always telling us to focus our attention on Jesus and do what He says, not Her.
rocky60191 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
But god is just made up.
calmreason 4 months ago
Roman Catholic Church the only 1 true church found by jesus christ, i'm catholic, i'm very strong in my faith. Proud to be a catholic..I pray that 1 day the whole world will see the truth and follow the true faith, the catholic faith...Amen.
tonganfoilole69 6 months ago 10
@tonganfoilole69 thank you for the nice comment and God bless you.
rizalbalagtas 5 months ago
@tonganfoilole69 the Roman Catholic Church is not the only church founded by christ... there were five.. which were called the Pentarchy, the Churches in the Jerusalem, Antioquia, Alexandria, Constantinople and the Rome.
kiryllangelo 4 months ago
@kiryllangelo Our church is founded on Peter. in accordance with the Wishes of Jesus. Period.
kevinjjfr 3 months ago
@kiryllangelo Early Father Irenaeus, (succession of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition.)This was just part of the letter. You see everything was to be delegated from Rome, meaning Rome had the head Authority. we know Peter was all these Different places, but when he left, he left and ended up in Rome.
dirtboy7777 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tonganfoilole69 HAIL CONSTANTINE HAIL CONSTANTINE the father and founder of the satanic roman catolic sect in the yr 313, and dont forget that constantine built the basilica of st peter
hamlets7 1 month ago
Christ knew that He is going back to the Father and His Church here on earth needs a visible leader so there will be shephered (John 21:15-17).
Jesus spoke aramaic "Cephas" ( massive rock) if Christ only meant small rock in aramaic, He would have said "ebna."
See Cephas in the Bible verses: John 1:42, 1 Cor. 1:12, 1 Cor. 15:5, 1 Cor. 9:5, and Gal. 2:9
dodge0808 1 year ago 9
You quoted: Christ is the Rock."
We don't deny it, because He is indeed the "Solid Rock", the "Chief Cornerstone and foundation" and because He is Holy One.
But in this case, it is very clear Christ was talking to Simon and naming him "Cephas" which means rock and giving him the keys to His Kingdom and so on.
dodge0808 1 year ago 7
According to Origen, Peter was crucified head downwards, by his own request because he considered himself unworthy to die in the same manner as Christ.[13] The crucifixion took place near an ancient Egyptian obelisk in the Circus of Nero.[14] The obelisk now stands in Saint Peter's Square and is revered as a "witness" to Peter's death. It is one of several ancient Obelisks of Rome.
dodge0808 1 year ago 9
The name Peter is "Petrus" in Latin and "Petros" in Greek, deriving from "petra" which means "stone" or "rock" in Greek.
It is believed by a long tradition that Peter, after a ministry of about thirty years, traveled to Rome and met his martyrdom there in the year 64 AD during the reign of the Roman Emperor Nero. His execution was one of the many martyrdoms of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome.
dodge0808 1 year ago 4
@dodge0808 Peace of Our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.Here is your brother in Faith who share the same DNA of Baptism and Confirmation as you. I'll thank God for you for doing a great job in His harvest. We need people like you to shine light into the darkness of ignorance, falsehood and lies which will lead to the loss souls. S.O.S.(Save Our Souls) many are crying out but are refusing to stretch out their hands to grasp on to the TRUTH . How sad. May I use you comments for my posts? Yrs in JMJ.
rocky60191 2 months ago 2
Comment removed
dodge0808 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rocky60191 Pax et bonum my friend! Thank you for the comment. Sure, you can use my comments, anytime. God bless you and your family.
dodge0808 2 months ago
Regarding Peter was there in Rome. Didn't you read the history?
After the crucifixion of Jesus in the second quarter of the 1st century AD, it is recorded in the Biblical book of the Acts of the Apostles that one of his twelve disciples, Simon known as Peter, a fisherman from Galilee, took a leadership position among Jesus' followers and was of great importance in the founding of the Christian Church.
dodge0808 1 year ago 4
Question # 2: Why isn't the 4th Council of Constantinople, held in 869, considered ecumenical? Please care to answer.
From a Catholic point of view, given that we see it as you separated yourselves from us, there is no reason for us to stop having Councils.
dodge0808 1 year ago 4
Post # 3
For the eternal order of the divine persons in their consubstantial communion implies that the Father, as "the principle without principle," (read Council of Florence (1442): DS 1331), is the first origin of the Spirit, but also that as Father of the only Son, He is with the Son, the single principle from which the Holy Spirit proceeds. See Cf. Council of Lyons II (1274): DS 850.
dodge0808 1 year ago 3
Post # 2
At the outset the Eastern tradition expresses the Father's character as first origin of the Spirit. By confessing the Spirit as he "who proceeds from the Father," it affirms that he comes from the Father through the Son.
Whereas the Western tradition expresses first the consubstantial communion between Father and Son, by saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
It says this, "legitimately and with good reason," (see Council of Florence 1439:DS 1302)
dodge0808 1 year ago 3
Correction (post # 4): Because the Scripture affirms...
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 13 From the beginning this acknowledgment of Christ's divine sonship will be the center of the apostolic faith, first professed by Peter as the Church's foundation.
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 Again, like I had stated before. it is the way certain verses in Scriptures are being interpreted to justify one's position. Jesus will build His Church upon a person's profession of faith in Him as the Christ. Catholic apologists want the "rock" to be Peter. St. Paul in I Corinthians 3:11, that "Christ is the Rock".The keys of the kingdom refers to a special authority that will be given to both Peter and the other Apostles.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
Post # 12 Similarly Paul will write, regarding his conversion on the road to Damascus, "When he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles..." "And in the synagogues immediately [Paul] proclaimed Jesus, saying, 'He is the Son of God.'"
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 11 Such is not the case for Simon Peter when he confesses Jesus as "the Christ, the Son of the living God", for Jesus responds solemnly: "Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven."
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 10 The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock (read John 21:15-17).
"The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head." This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church's very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 9
He even identified himself with the Temple by presenting himself as God's definitive dwelling-place among men. Therefore his being put to bodily death presaged the destruction of the Temple, which would manifest the dawning of a new age in the history of salvation: "The hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father."
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 8
Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it. Far from having been hostile to the Temple, where he gave the essential part of his teaching, Jesus was willing to pay the Temple-tax, associating with him Peter, whom he had just made the foundation of his future Church.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 7
Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. Through a revelation from the Father, Peter had confessed: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Our Lord then declared to him: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." Christ, the "living Stone", thus assures his Church, built on Peter, of victory over the powers of death.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 6
19] "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 5
This document will discuss the nature of this authority, which is the basis for not only the Papacy, but for Apostolic Succession itself.
Matthew 16:18 says;"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. "
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 4
You quoted: "St. Peter was the "voice of the Apostles, but nowhere in Scriptures does have authority or mastery over the Apostles."
Wrong! Why? Because the Scirptures affirms that the Catholic Church teaches the Biblical account of the foundation of the Church, by Christ, on Peter. Peter is given a specific authority, as are the other Apostles.
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 You go into a big discussion about the Holy Trinity, but never confront the issue and addition of the filioque.
The foundation of the Church is Jesus Christ. There is nothing in scriptures that suggest that the "Church" is built on just one of the Apostles. All the Apostles are given specific authority from Christ. In Scriptures St. Paul played a more important role in the life of the assembly in Rome.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
who among the apostles received an authoriy to BIND AND LOOSE?
and how do you understand the writings of john 21:15-17?
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
"You go into a big discussion about the Holy Trinity, but never confront the issue and the addition of filioque."
I have one word, like I've said, I'll give you a thorough discussion. Please read my posts 10 to 15.
More so, the introduction of filioque into the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed by the Latin liturgy constitutes moreover, even today, a point of disagreement with the Orthodox Churches.
dodge0808 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
You said:"There is nothing in scriptures that suggest that the "Church is bulit on just one of the Apostles."
It seems like you misunderstood my posts. Again, read Matthew 16:18-19 and John 21:15-17.
dodge0808 1 year ago 3
Post # 3
To early writers like Clement of Rome (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107), and Irenaeus (c. 180) it was common knowledge that he worked and died in Rome."
And, all this points to the theory that Peter was writing from Rome, which is supported by the evidence of Tertullian (praescrip haeret, 36) and Eusebius (Eccl History, 2.25.8; 2.15.2 and 3.1.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 2
Correction: issue...
It seems certain that Peter spent his closing years in Rome. Although the New Testamentnt about such a stay, it is supported by 1 Peter 5:13, where 'BABYLON' is a code-name for "Rome", and by the strong case for linking the Gospel of Mark, who as Peter's companion (1 Pet 5:13) is said to have derived its substance from him, with Rome.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Correction: gradually not gradullay. Thanks.
dodge0808 1 year ago
My next visit, I will answer your posts regarding the Papacy.
See you and pax et bonum!
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 15
The affirmation of the filioque does not appear in the Creed confessed in 381 at Constantinople. But Pope St. Leo I, following an ancient Latin and Alexandrian tradition, had already confessed it dogmatically in 447 (see cf. Leo I, Quam laudabiliter (447): DS 284), even before Rome, in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon, came to recognize and receive the Symbol of 381.
The use of this formula is the Creed was gradullay admitted into the Latin liturgy (between the 8th & 11th cent.)
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 The addition of the filioque in the west goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. Rome committed an error by the addition. No justification can dismiss that fact.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
refute the writing of Pope Leo I. stop whining.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
You quoted: The addition of the filioque in the west goes against the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. Rome committed an error by the addition. No justification can dismiss that fact."
It is easy for you to give a conclusion my friend. Ecumenical Councils are the norm for developing doctrine, but, at this point, I have to ask for clarification, for two questions only: 1. How is a council determined to be Ecumenical by the Orthodox?
dodge0808 1 year ago 4
Post # 14
And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom He is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son. ( Council of Florence (1439): DS 1300-1301.)
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 13
The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit "proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)."
The Council of Florence in 1438 explains:"The Holy Spirit is eternally from the Father and the Son; He has in nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 12
Correction: Passover...
One and equal with the Father and the Son, "of the same substance and also of the same nature."
Yet he is not called the Spirit of the Father alone, but the Spirit of both the Father and the Son." (Council of Toledo XI (675): DS 527).
The Creed of the Church from the Council of Constantinople confesses: "With the Father and the Son, He is worshipped and glorified." (Nicene Creed; cf. DS 150).
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 11
The apostolic faith concerning the Spirit was confessed by the second ecumenical council at Constantinople (381): "We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who procceds from the Father." (Nicene Creed; cf DS 150).
Father as "the source and origin of the whole divinity." (Council of Toledo VI (638): DS 490). But the eternal origin of the Spirit is not unconnected with the Son's origin: "the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity is God,...
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 10
The eternal origin of the Holy Spirit is revealed in His mission in time. The Spirit is sent to the apostles and to the Church both by the Father in the name of the Son, and by the Son in person, once He had returned to the Father. (Read John 14:26; 15:26 and 16:14)
That is, the sending of the person of the Spirit after Jesus' glorification (see John 7:39), reveals in its fullness the mystery of the Holy Trinity.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post #9
We believe, the Father and the Son revealed by the Holy Spirit.
Before His Passoever, Jesus announced the sending of "another Paraclete" (Advocate), the Holy Spirit.
At work since creation, having previously "spoken through the prophets," the Spirit will now be with and in the disciples, to teach them and guide them "into all the truth." (Read Gen. 1:2, John 14:17, 26, 16:13)
The Holy Spirit is thus revealed as another divine person with Jesus and the Father.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 8
Following this apostolic tradition, the Church confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicea (325) that the Son is "consubstantial" with the Father, that is, one only God with Him.
The second ecumenical council, held at Constantinople in 381, kept this expression in its formulation of the Nicene Creed and confessed "the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father."
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 7
Who is eternally Son only in relation to His Father:"No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal Hiom." (Read Mt. 11:27)
For this reason the apostles confess Jesus to be the Word: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" as "the image of the invisible God"; "as the radiance of the glory of God and the very stamp of His nature." John 1:1, Col 1:15, Heb.1:3
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 6
So, by calling God "Father," the language of faith indicates two main things: 1) that God is the first origin of everything and transcendent authority; 2) and the He is at the same time goodness and loving care for all His children.
Regarding the Son, Jesus revealed that God is the Father in an unheard-of sense: He is Father not only in being Creator; He is eternally Father in relation to His only Son.
Continued.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 5
To be sure, God has left traces of His Trinitarian being in His work of creation and in His Revelation throughout the Old Testament. But His inmost Being as Holy Trinity is a mystery that is inaccessible to reason alone or even to Israel's faith before the Incarnation of God's Son and the sending of the Holy Spirit.
The deity is often considered the "father of gods and of men."
In Israel, God is called "Father" inasmuch as He is Creator of the world.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 4
Through the economy the theology is revealed to us; but conversely, the theology illuminates the whole economy.
God's works reveal who He is in Himself; the mystery of His most being enlightens our understanding of all His works.
So it is, analogously, among human persons.
The Trinity is a mystery of faith in the strict sense, one of the "mysteries that are hidden in God, which can never be known unless they are revealed by God." (See Dei Filius 4:DS 3015)
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 3
3)And, how, by the divine missions of the Son and the Holy Spirit, God the Father fulfills the "plan of His loving goodness" of creation, redemption, and sanctification.
The Fathers of the Church distinguish between theology and economy.
"Theology" refers to the mystery of God's inmost life within the Blessed Trinity and "economy" to all the works by which God reveals Himself and communicates His life.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 2
The whole history of salvation is identical with the history of the way and the means by which the one true God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, reveals Himself to men "and reconciles and unites with Himself those who turn aways from sin."
This paragraph expounds briefly :
1) How the mystery of the Blessed Trinity was revealed.
2) How the Church has articulated the doctrine of the faith regarding this mystery.
Continued...
dodge0808 1 year ago
Anyway my friend, let's have a thorough discussion regarding these dogmas you mentioned below. Do you want me to address each point?
I've already addressed some. I am willing and eager to try and explain Catholic belief, as I best understand it. God bless...
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 The verb "shall send" is in the future, expressing something that will happen in the future. In the "procession" the "centre" is the Father, in the "mission" it is the Son. The procession happens fo the Holy Trinity, the mission for the world. The "procession" happens outside of time, the "mission' within time. It seems the Western Church is confusing the "procession" with the "mission". The filioque places the Holy Spirit in a state of subordination to the Father and the Son,.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
Thank you for the reply. Let me explain to you point by point.
The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of Christian faith and life. It is the mystery of God in Himself. It is therefore the source of all the other mysteries of faith, the light that enlightens them.
It is the most fundamental and essential teaching in the "heirarchy of the truths of faith.'
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and is sent into the world by the Son. Each Person of the Holy Trinity has His own characteristics. The Father is "unbegotten", Christ is " begotten:". He is born eternally from the Father. The Holy Spirit "Proceeds" eternally from the Father. The verb "proceeds" is in the present tense and expresses the eternal continuous procession of the Holy Spirit.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@dodge0808 The Orthodox have, since the early Church, given Communion under both species, bread(leavened) and wine. The Catholics changed this after the split from the East in 1054. Catholics just use unleavened bread.
Now the filioque. This addition is heretical. The addition goes against the decisions of the Second,Third, and Fourth Ecumenical Councils, which confirmed the trueness of the Symbol of Faith.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@dodge0808 The dogma of the Immaculate Conception, defined in 1854, is rejected by the Orthodox because of the erroneous understanding of original sin underlying it. By saying that Mary was free from original sin, the Catholics are saying that Mary was not mortal. The Orthodox calls Mary, "the first of the redeemed:" the first human to receive the great blessing of salvation now available to mankind.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@dodge0808 Christ made a complete sacrifice for ou sins, once we are forgiven ,we are forgiven.There is no need to provide explanation for some "residual" debt which remains after one is forgiven. The "intermediate state" in Orthodox theology, is not a state between heaven and hell in which some souls must spend time before entering heaven, but a state of repose where all souls rest in anticipation of the Last Judgement.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@dodge0808 There are many other differences and practices between the current Catholic Mass and the Orthodox Liturgy. Fasting is regularly adhered to, while the Catholics have changed this.
Orthodoxy avoids understanding salvation in legalistic terms. The idea of purgatory is based on an obviously legalistic notion that the soul "must pay what owes", before being admitted to the full joys of heaven.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@dodge0808 When was St. Peter actually in Rome and for how long? I cannot get a straight answer and historians are still arguing the point. St. Peter was the "voice" of the Apostles, but nowhere in Scriptures does He have authority or mastery over the Apostles. Catholic apologists use certain verses in Scripture to justify the Petrine issue. Their interpretations are carved in stone, and I find it a waste of time to ague over this issue and their interpretations.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
Isuse number two: The Papacy.
You asked: When was Peter actually in Rome and for how long?
The Scripture said so: 1 Peter 5:12-14,"Silvanus, our faithful brother as I consider him, I have written to you briefly, exhorting and testifying that this is the true grace of God in which you stand. She who is in BABYLON, elect together with you, greets you; and so does Mark my son. Greet one another with a kiss of love. Peace to you all who are in Christ Jesus. Amen."
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 You still did not answer the Question. How long (the years)was St. Peter in Rome?
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@dodge0808 Orthodox consider Rome, "first amongst equals", but reject the doctrine of Papal infallibility. This was an innovation that had no precedent in the early Church. It was formulated as a theological justification for the political power which historical circumstances had confirmed upon the Church.
The Apostle Peter was not bishop, but an Apostle. Apostle Paul was in Rome prior to Peter and Apostle Paul appointed Linus as the first bishop of Rome.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
In addition with that, I am certained there were a number of good and holy men filling the office during these centuries, but to imply that the seat of the Bishop of Rome is empty while the Orthodox maintained Apostolic succession seems disengenuous to me.
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 2
Substantial difference is an exaggeration, as the differences had their genesis after the schism.
Like I said, there are over 20 rites that have returned in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.
Pace' e bene!
dodge0808 1 year ago
Post # 2
Yes, in the 11th century there was a political schism between the East and West parts of the Church. There were liturgical differences only.
The faith remained the same, though the names changed. The West called "Roman Catholic (One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church)" and the East "Orthodox."
There are over twenty Orthodox Rites which returned in full to the Catholic Church, and there are talks know how the entire East coming back.
That was Christianity.
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 The causes of the split were the addition of the filoque, and papal infallibility and authority. Both Churches prior to the split were Catholic and Apostolic.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
"Both Churches prior to the split were Catholic and Apostolic."
You said so...
Anyways, the Primacy was the political part. It was the driving the force.
And the filioque was a minor issue, and does not change the faith. This was a discussion as far back as the council of Nicea on the wording.
dodge0808 1 year ago
@dodge0808 T he word "catholic" meaning universal/whole, not Roman. The filioque changed the theology of the Holy Trinity and is a deviation from Orthodox truth. This changed the teaching of the procession. The Roman Church violated the decree of the Third and subsequent Ecumenical Councils, which forbade the introduction of any kind of change into the Nicene Creed.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
you said this> the word catholic meaning universal/whole, not Roman.
so if i take that statement> the word catholic meaning universal/whole, NOT ORTHODOX.
peace
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas You are missing the point.The Orthodox Church is both Catholic and Apostolic. This defined the early Church. The Orthodox have kept those teachings and traditions of "orthodoxy", while the Roman Church has added new dogmas and theology foreign to the early Church, such as Papal infallibility, the filioque addition,the dogmas of purgatory and the immaculate conception, etc.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
are you trying to insist that roman catholic is not catholic church?
then we should have a discussion regarding those catholic dogmas that orthodox did not recognize it.
pick one among those and we'll start.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas All I am saying is that the Orthodox have not added dogmas or changed theology like Rome has. I have already listed some of the additions: the filioque, Papal infallibility, immaculate conception and purgatory.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
I am neither optimistic or the reverse. I did address once the doctrinal issues, however, these differences existed and thus, the reason that doctrines needed to be defined and articulated.
This was the issue as Christianity developed. It is easy to sit back in 2010 and view these issues through rose colored glassed.
As a matter of fact, many of the differences between East and West developed after the Schism.
dodge0808 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
I am simply speaking what is taking place. The 20 rites matter very much, as it shows that the political differences can be healed.
Regarding the Papacy, well, Eastern Bishops always asked the Popes for advice.
If you're an Orthodox Christian then you need to study more.
There is no Orthodox Christian I know that denies the supremacy of Rome as a "first among equals."
dodge0808 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
Granted, Orthodox Christians do not believe in a Pope, but they most definitely agree with the Western Patriarch, the Bishop of Rome, as a first among equals.
Shalom!
dodge0808 1 year ago
Sorry to butt-in my friends.
@ vasilyjc1955
Well, for some centuries there was one Catholic Church. There were hetrodox pockets that existed, and even you would call them heretical.
dodge0808 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What's Wrong with the Catholic Church?----- good video check it out
BABOUSHKA21 1 year ago
correction> brothers and sisters in Christ
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rizalbalagtasHAIL CONSTANTINE HAIL CONSTANTINE ,the father and founder of the satanic roman catolic sect in the yr 313 , and dont forget that constantine built the basiclica of st peter
hamlets7 1 year ago
the great schism was actually just a tear in the Church not a complete division.
it's like a blanket that has a tear down the middle, although it's partially torn it's still one blanket. peace
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas It was a complete division. The Orthodox consider the Catholic Sacraments as being invalid. You better research history, it was Rome that separated from the Eastern Orthodox. In AD1054, Roman legates travelled to Cerularius to deny him the title Ecumenical Patriarch and to insist that he recognize the Church of Rome's claim to be the head and mother of the churches. Cerularius refused. Cardinal Humbert, leader of the Latin contingent, excommunicated Cerularius ( the Orthodox)..
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
in 3 john 1:9-10 clearly says> I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will have nothing to do with us. 10So if I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us. Not satisfied with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
The true Church founded by Christ on Pentecost ,AD33, is the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox have not deviated from the traditions or dogma of the early Church. The 4 Orthodox Patriarchates can historically trace back to an original 12 Apostles of Christ.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
with due my respect, i would like to insist the documentation (early writings) from our early fathers. those tell the truth.
God bless...
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas What documentation are you seeking? The Christian Church was started in the eastern part of the empire. The entire early Church was both "catholic and apostolic", and "orthodox" in doctrine. When Rome separated from the east in AD1054, the other four Patriarchates, Jerusalem, Constantinople,, Antioch and Alexandria, kept the "orthodox" doctrines and traditions of the early Church. Rome was deviating from these teachings.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
i pointed the writing of st. ignatius of antioch> where there is Christ Jesus there is catholic church.
yes Jesus founded only one Church, and when it began, it was fully united.
and we know about the great schism or divide between the East and West happened in 1054 when Pope Leo IX and Eastern Patriarch Michael I excommunicated each other.
one of the disputes regarding the trinity.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
or the nicene creed known as the filioque.
the Western Church stated that the Holy Spirit came from the Father and the Son, the Eastern Church believed the Holy Spirit to be only of the Father.
eventhough there is still a division, we do have much in common with the Orthodox.
in fact, in May of 2001, Pope John Paul II and Archbishop Christodoulos Paraskevaides of Greece met to begin a reconciliation.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas The West's addition of the filioque changes the theology of the Holy Trinity and went against the decision of the Second, Third and Fourth Ecumenical Councils. The Orthodox reject the Catholic dogmas of purgatory, Immaculate Conception and original sin. The Orthodox have, since the early Church, given Communion under both species, bread(leavened) and wine. Rome changed this after the split. The main obstacle is Papal primacy. Rome needs to return to the apostolic traditions.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
the famous case, long afterwards, of the Decree of Florence and the forms kath on tropon, quemadmodum, shows how much confusion the use of two languages may cause.
these causes then combined to produce two halves of Christendom, an Eastern and a Western half, each distinguished in various ways from the other.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
they are certainly not sufficient to account for a separation of those halves; only we notice that already there was a consciousness of two entities, the first marking of a line of division, through which rivalry, jealousy, hatred might easily cut a separation.
the causes of this are the rivalry and hatred arose from several causes. undoubtedly the first, the root of all the quarrel, was the advance of the See of Constantinople.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
in this deplorable story we notice the following points. It is easier to understand how a schism continues than how it began.
schisms are easily made; they are enormously difficult to heal. the religious instinct is always conservative; there is always a strong tendency to continue the existing state of things. At first the schismatics were reckless innovators; then with the lapse of centuries their cause seems to be the old one; it is the Faith of the Fathers.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
there is not really any question of doctrine involved. it is not a heresy, but a schism. the Decree of Florence made every possible concession to their feelings.
and there is no real reason why they should not sign that Decree now.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas The main causes of the Schism of AD1054, were Papal authority and the filioque addition. With regards to the Council of Florence, the Orthodox would have had to accept the innovations made by Rome, Papal authority, purgatory,the Latin teaching of the consecration of the Holy Gifts,the filioque addition and others.This Council was rejected, and those Orthodox delegates that signed it were subsequently defrocked.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
well from the time of Diotrephes (3 john 1:9-10) there have been continual schisms, of which the greater number were in the East. Arianism produced a huge schism; the Nestorian and Monophysite schisms still last.
however, the Eastern Schism always means that most deplorable quarrel of which the final result is the separation of the vast majority of Eastern Christians from union with the Catholic Church, the schism that produced the separated, so-called Orthodox Church.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas I am Orthodox. Just need some clarification, what do you mean so-called Orthodox Church? It was Rome who separated from the Eastern Christians.
vasilyjc1955 1 year ago
@vasilyjc1955
the Orthodox split the Church that's why it's called THE GREAT SCHISM.
i'm catholic, although i respect Orthodox as bothers and sisters in Christ.
my beliefs are that true Catholic and Orthodox Christians, but it depends on the Protestant or Anglicans are saved. because although Catholicism and Orthodox are considered different Churches they are not completely torn apart.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas i agree with you. i'm from Iraq and we know that the orthadox church broke away from the Catholic church but we can say that they did not completely throw away the teachings but they're just some-apart,like the Assyrian Catholic Church of the East.they broke apart of some other reasons, like racial identity between about if Chaldeans are Assyrians or are Assyrians teaching of St. Thomas still Catholic-like and so on. but the those churches still recognizes the councils. God bless
Catholicist 1 year ago
@Catholicist
you said it well. God bless.....
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
May the lord continue to bless his true church!
MrMikeSam 1 year ago
@MrMikeSam
amen. as Christ promised that he is always to the close of the age.
thank you for your post bro and welcome.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas Coming from a Knight, you are most welcome my spiritual brother
MrMikeSam 1 year ago
@MrMikeSam
feel free to post in this thread brother.
God bless you.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
there is only one church whom Jesus himself established through the rock(Peter)
and that is the Roman Catholic Church.,
the one
Holy and Apostolic Church of Christ!!!
the gates of hell would not prevail against it.,
the Church survived several attacks from her earthly tyrants faced several threat from the non believers suffered from a series divisions and schisms.,
but yet she s still standing strongly for Christ is always in his Church
THE LORD WILL NEVER FORSAKE HIS PEOPLE
gahnz45 1 year ago 3
@gahnz45
well said. God bless......
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas and also with you,.
let us pray for....
more conversions.,
and may God bless the Pope and all the church people with good harvest in his vineyard,.
gahnz45 1 year ago
@gahnz45
yes, God is always with His people (his Church).
thanks for your nice post. peace
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
@rizalbalagtas
Patuloy nating Ipagtangol ang TUNAY na SIMBAHANG TINATAG mismo n PANGINOONG HESUS!
MrJbo20 1 year ago
@MrJbo20
salamat sa pagpunta dito sa thread bro.
ginagawa lang natin ang nararapat at ipagtanggol ang iglesyang tatag ni Kristo.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
VIVA CathoIica!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
pangetska 1 year ago
@pangetska
thanks for your post. God bless....
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
BYE to ALL and sorry po sa lahat kakapagod rizal at dodge GOD BLESS nalang po.... mwaaahhh..... hehehehehe
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
@JACKHUNTER99
ang pag-unay awayay sa mga nagkadaiyang born against, pruyba lang nga sila sama sa ginagharian ni satanas nga gaunay away sumala sa giingon ni Hesus. Pila na ba ka grupo ang mga born again karon nga adunay nagkasumpaki nga mga pagtulon-an ug doktrina? example: Quiboly vs. Jackhunter (Baptist), etc.
deaerator07 1 year ago
@deaerator07
welcome back bro.
naku bro alam natin ang pinaka function ni bro jack yabang at pagtuligsa lang ang gusto niyang gawin.
hamon pa nga siya ng ONLINE DEBATE sa atin pero ng hinarap ni bro dodge ang daming dahilan sabay nawala sa ere. hehe
ayon pumunta naman yan sa thread ng mga taga san carlos doon panay ang tira sa ating pananampalataya walang pagbabago pabalik balik lang ang isyu.
rizalbalagtas 1 year ago
JACKHUNTER99
Ang tanong dito kapatid na kayo mga BAC naniniwala sa rapture, tanggapin si Kristo na personal Lord and Savior, etc.
Kung saan paniniwala rin ito ng Baptist.
Sino ang tunay sa inyo?
Shalom!
dodge0808 2 years ago
jack....
alin ba ang unang naitatag ang baptist o ang born again?
kasi kadiwa ninyo ang baptist dahil sila ang nag-originate ng inyong pananampalataya. peace....
rizalbalagtas 2 years ago
sabi ng hindi Christian si Joel osteen hanapin mo sa youtube discussion between Joel Osteen(false Christian) and Paul Washer(True Christian) sabi ko sa inyo noon na marami ang nag papakilala na sila daw ay born again like sugo ni Quiboloy.... gets mo??
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
@JACKHUNTER99
musta jackie... nakaka miss din ang youtube... ang mga salita ni jesus regarding interdenominationalism ay akmang-akma sa mga born against christians.
Apan si Jesus nga nasayod sa ilang hunahuna miingon: Ang gingharian nga magkabahinbahin ug mag-unay, mapukan. Ang lungsod o pani-malay nga magkabahinbahin dili molungtad. Kon ang usa ka yawa moabog sa lain, nabahinbahin siya batok sa kaugalingon. Unsaon pagba-rog sa iyang gingharian? - Mt. 12:25-26
deaerator07 1 year ago
Nice Video. I like the quote from St. Ignatius. He was an awesome teacher.
whatutubeismissing 2 years ago
God bless you... thank you for stopping by this thread.
rizalbalagtas 2 years ago
jack....
mahilig kang magdeny si osteen ay baptist iyan which is your faith of born again group originated by baptist.
para kng si Pilato HUGAS KAMAY ka lagi. peace...
rizalbalagtas 2 years ago
GITUIS pa man gani ninyo ang 10 commandments how much more pa kya sa LIMBO??, PURGATORY??, MOTHER OF GOD, etc... weheheyyyyy
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
there is no teaching of the catholic contradic to its doctrine well in fact we the catholics are the owner of that bible. you have. the catholic church produce the bible and not the bilble produce our church.
jeffreypaloga 2 years ago
jeffrey....
thank you for the nice comment.
God bless.......
rizalbalagtas 2 years ago
@jeffreypaloga
amen.... you said it well
deaerator07 1 year ago
2Pedro 3:15 Ug isipa ninyong kaluwasan ang pagkamainantuson sa Ginoo. Sa ingon usab niini ang atong hinigugmang igsoon nga si Pablo nagsulat kaninyo sumala sa kaalam nga gihatag kaniya,
16 nga nagsulti mahitungod niini sumala sa iyang ginahimo sa tanan niyang mga sulat; nga sa maong mga sulat aduna ganiy mga butang nga malisud sabton, nga GINATUIS SA MGA WALAY ALAMAG ug sa mga mabalhinon ug kinaiya, ingon sa GINABUHAT USAB NILA SA UBANG KASULATAN SA PAGTUIS NIINI
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
dearator you want verse na SWAK NA SWAK sa inyong Church ug mga teachings??? huh??? mao nay gi ingon na pataka lang ka ug sulti kanang PSTR. nga si Joel Osten daw ay AGAINST ang kanyang turo sa aming faith in other words yung mga rapist na sinasabi mo ay
hindi namin yan kapapanampaltaya kasi iba ang kanilang doctrine.. kya wag mong ipilit hahahaha
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
2Pedro 2:17 Kini sila maoy mga tuboran nga walay tubig, ug mga gabon nga pinalid sa unos; alang kanila gitagana ang labing mangiob nga kangitngit.
18 Kay sa magalitok silag mga pinaburot nga kakawangan, pinaagi sa maulagon nga mga PANGIBOG SA LAWAS, ilang ginahaylo ang mga tawo nga bag-o pa lamang nga nga nanagpakaikyas gikan kanila nga nagakinabuhi sa kasaypanan.
pag human nilag dani sa mga chikay ilahang rapepon... SATANIC PRIEST hehehe...
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
2Pedro 2:3 ¶ Ug tungod sa ilang kadalo kamo ilang panapion pinaagi sa tinumotomo nga mga pulong; sukad pa kaniadto sa karaan ang hukom kanila sa silot wala maghunong, ug ang ilang pagkalaglag wala magkatulog.
4 Kay kon ang mga manulonda wala kaloy-i sa Dios sa diha nga nakasala sila, hinonoa iyang gitambog sila ngadto sa infierno ug gibalhog ngadto sa mga lungib nga mangiob aron igatagana hangtud sa pagpanghukom;
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
UTOT nimo dearator dili jud ko maminaw sa inyong mga debater og mga preacher ninyo dearator....! sukwahi....! og pataka lang ug sulti hehehehe naa daw LIMBO matud pa sa Catholic teacher... pero ilahang gitago-an ang maong Satanic na pagtolun-an.... hahahaha
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
kung pangutan-on taka dearator... nakakakita o narinig mo na ba ang tinig ng Diyos??? ang sagot ni dearator ay WALA!
mga supernatural experiences dearator na ka experience ka na ba?? sagot ni dearator ay WALA!
kung mao kana basin mo ingon si God sa imo dearator kinsa ka?? wala ko makaila sa imo pahawa kamong namumuhat og daotan! luhod og rebulto og uban pang butang na wala nila hisabti....! weheheheheyyyy.....
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago
Tin-aw kaayo dearator na kamo ang nasa hula ng Daniel.... na ang sabi ay: ang LAW ni GOD ay e change... ug mabasa pud nato sa Revelation daghan kaayo mga hula ang mga prophet na swak na swak sa inyo.... ang maong verse na Mateo 13:14-15 ay para na sa inyoha.... ngano? kay dili man gani ka ka dungog sa tingog sa Ginoo... ang mga taong hangal ay hindi makakakita sa mukha ng Diyos at hindi sila pinapakitaan ng mga vision... gara-a pud nimo dearator noh??
JACKHUNTER99 2 years ago