RELIGION

[dacs]

---

@Meganda:

From your post:

If you claim your religion is the true church then how come it doesnt have any trace that is so.

What kind of 'trace' are you looking for?

[MrBiddle]

What kind of 'trace' are you looking for?

Ayaw nalang kay di jed ma trace.... and if you look at what prophecy has to say about ancient history it only says that Rome will evolve into a tyrannical faction (in an eccelesiastical sense) and corrupt the whole of the earth (Dan. 7: 23) (Rev. 17: 5)

Babylon
Medo-Persia
Greece
Rome

and we are still waiting for the 5th and final kingdom.

Peter did NOT unloose his authority to anyone else, unlike Judas who was accursed hence Peter said May another take his service, but Peter on the other hand was not accursed so he carried on his role of apostleship and presbyter onto completion til death.

Was he a vicar of Christ? He only referred to himself as a fellow elder - 1 Pet. 5: 1

Who is the Chief Cornerstone?

1 Cor. 3: 11
Eph. 2: 20
Deut. 32: 4, 15
1 Pet. 2: 4 - 8 (and in context of Matt. 16: 18 who are the "living stones" or the "rocks" that make up the Spiritual temple or "building" of the Lord?)

[dacs]

@Meganda:

Here are quotation from the first four hundred years of Christian writings from the Church Fathers:

"The church of God which sojourns at Rome to the church of God which sojourns at Corinth ... But if any disobey the words spoken by him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger."
Clement of Rome, Pope, 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, 1, 59:1 (c.A.D. 96), in GILES,1-2

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Mast High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who farmed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit, worthy of being deemed holy, and which presides over love..."
Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, Prologue (A.D. 110), in ANF, I:73

"There is extant also another epistle written by Dionysius to the Romans, and addressed to Soter, who was bishop at that time. We cannot do better than to subjoin some passages from this epistle, in which he commends the practice of the Romans which has been retained down to the persecution in our own days. His words are as follows: For from the beginning it has been your practice to do good to all the brethren in various ways, and to send contributions to many churches in every city. Thus relieving the want of the needy, and making provision for the brethren in the mines by the gifts which you have sent from the beginning, you Romans keep up the hereditary customs of the Romans, which your blessed bishop Soter has not only maintained, but also added to, furnishing an abundance of supplies to the saints, and encouraging the brethren from abroad with blessed words, as a loving father his children.' In this same epistle he makes mention also of Clement's epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: To-day we have passed the Lord's holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement.' The same writer also speaks as follows concerning his own epistles, alleging that they had been mutilated: As the brethren desired me to write epistles, I wrote. And these epistles the apostles of the devil have filled with tares, cutting out some things and adding others. For them a woe is reserved. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at if some have attempted to adulterate the Lord's writings also, since they have formed designs even against writings which are of less accounts.' "
Dionysius of Corinth, To Pope Soter (A.D. 171), Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, 4:23, in NPNF, 2:1:200-202

"Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere."
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3:3:2 (A.D. 180), in ANF, I:1415-416

"And he says to him again after the resurrection, 'Feed my sheep.' It is on him that he builds the Church, and to him that he entrusts the sheep to feed. And although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single Chair, thus establishing by his own authority the source and hallmark of the (Church's) oneness. No doubt the others were all that Peter was, but a primacy is given to Peter, and it is (thus) made clear that there is but one flock which is to be fed by all the apostles in common accord. If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he still confidence that he is in the Church? This unity firmly should we hold and maintain, especially we bishops, presiding in the Church, in order that we may approve the episcopate itself to be the one and undivided."
Cyprian, The Unity of the Church, 4-5 (Primacy Text, A.D. 251/256), NE, 228-229

"After such things as these, moreover, they still dare--a false bishop having been appointed for them by, heretics--to set sail and to bear letters from schismatic and profane persons to the throne of Peter, and to the chief church whence priestly unity takes its source; and not to consider that these were the Romans whose faith was praised in the preaching of the apostle, to whom faithlessness could have no access."
Cyprian, To Cornelius, Epistle 54/59:14 (A.D. 252), in ANF, V:344

"Supposing, as you assert, that some offence rested upon those persons, the case ought to have been conducted against them, not after this manner, but according to the Canon of the Church. Word should have been written of it to us all , that so a just sentence might prceed from all. For the sufferers were Bishops, and Churches of no ordinary note, but those which the Apostles themselves had governed in their own persons. And why was nothing said to us concerning the Church of the Alexandrians in particular? Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us, and then for a just decision to be passed from this place? If then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you, readily bear with me: what I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed Apostle Peter, that I signify to you; and I should not have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us."
Athanasius, Pope Julius to the Eusebians, Defense Against the Arians, 35 (A.D. 347), in NPNF2, IV:118

Athanasius attended and sanctioned the deliberations of the Council of Sardica and referred to the Council of Sardica as "the great Council" (Defense Against the Arians 1) or "the Holy Synod" (Letter to the People of Antioch 5)

"Bishop Hosius said: This also it is necessary to add, that no bishop pass from his own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless indeed he be called by his brethren, that we seem not to close the gates of charity. And this case likewise is to be provided for, that if in any province a bishop has some matter against his brother and fellow-bishop, neither of the two should call in as arbiters bishops from another province. But if perchance sentence be given against a bishop in any matter and he supposes his case to be not unsound but good, in order that the question may be reopened, let us, if it seem good to your charity, honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, and let those who gave judgment write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, so that, if necessary, the case may be retried by the bishops of the neighbouring provinces and let him appoint arbiters; but if it cannot be shown that his case is of such a sort as to need a new trial, let the judgment once given not be annulled, but stand good as before."
Council of Sardica, Canon III (A.D. 343/344), in NPNF2, XIV:416-417

"Bishop Gaudentius said: If it seems good to you, it is necessary to add to this decision full of sincere charity which thou hast pronounced, that if any bishop be deposed by the sentence of these neighbouring bishops, and assert that he has fresh matter in defence, a new bishop be not settled in his see, unless the bishop of Rome judge and render a decision as to this."
Council of Sardica, Canon IV (A.D. 343/344), in NPNF2, XIV:418

"Bishop Hosius said: Decreed, that if any bishop is accused, and the bishops of the same region assemble and depose him from his office, and he appealing, so to speak, takes refuge with the most blessed bishop of the Roman church, and he be willing to give him a hearing, and think it right to renew the examination of his case, let him be pleased to write to those fellow-bishops who are nearest the province that they may examine the particulars with care and accuracy and give their votes on the matter in accordance with the word of truth. And if any one require that his case be heard yet again, and at his request it seem good to move the bishop of Rome to send presbyters a latere, let it be in the power of that bishop, according as he judges it to be good and decides it to be right that some be sent to be judges with the bishops and invested with his authority by whom they were sent. And be this also ordained. But if he think that the bishops are sufficient for the examination and decision of the matter let him do what shall seem good in his most prudent judgment. The bishops answered: What has been said is approved."
Council of Sardica, Canon V (A.D. 343/344), in NPNF2, XIV:419

"What we have always believed, that we now know, for experience is proving and confirming for each of us what he has heard with his ears. It is true what the Apostle Paul, the most blessed teacher of the Gentiles, said of himself: 'Do ye seek a proof of him who speaks in me?' For, since the Lord Christ dwelt in him, there can be no doubt that the Spirit spoke by through his soul and animated the instrument of his body. And thus you, dearly beloved brother, though distant in body, have been with us in unison of mind and will. The reason for your absence was both honorable and imperative, that the schismatic wolves might not rob and plunder by stealth nor the heretical dogs bark madly in the rapid fury nor the very serpent, the devil, discharge his blasphemous venom. So it seems to us right and altogether fitting that priests of the Lord from each and every province should report to their head, that is, to the See of Peter, the Apostle."
Council of Sardica, To Pope Julius (A.D. 342), as cited by James T. Shotwell and Louise Ropes Loomis The See of Peter (New York:Columbia,1927), pp.527-528.

"You cannot deny that you know that in the city of Rome the Chair was first conferred on Peter, in which the prince of all the Apostles, Peter,sat ... in which Chair unity should be preserved by all, so that he should now be a schismatic and a sinner who should set up another Chair against that unique one."
Optatus of Mileve, The Schism of Donatists, 2:2-3 (c.A.D. 367), in GCC, 55

"For the good of unity Blessed Peter deserved to be preferred before the rest, and alone received the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, that he might communicate them to the rest."
Optatus of Mileve, The Schism of Donatists, 7:3 (c.A.D. 367), in GCC, 50

"Since the East, shattered as it is by the long-standing feuds, subsisting between its peoples, is bit by bit tearing into shreds the seamless vest of the Lord, woven from the top throughout,' since the foxes are destroying the vineyard of Christ, and since among the broken cisterns that hold no water it is hard to discover the sealed fountain' and the garden inclosed,' I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul. I appeal for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ. The wide space of sea and land that lies between us cannot deter me from searching for the pearl of great price.' Wheresoever the body is, there will the eagles be gathered together.' Evil children have squandered their patrimony; you alone keep your heritage intact. The fruitful soil of Rome, when it receives the pure seed of the Lord, bears fruit an hundredfold; but here the seed corn is choked in the furrows and nothing grows but darnel or oats. In the West the Sun of righteousness is even now rising; in the East, Lucifer, who fell from heaven, has once more set his throne above the stars. Ye are the light of the world,' ye are the salt of the earth,' ye are "vessels of gold and of silver." Here are vessels of wood or of earth, which wait for the rod of iron,and eternal fire. Yet, though your greatness terrifies me, your kindness attracts me. From the priest I demand the safe-keeping of the victim, from the shepherd the protection due to the sheep. Away with all that is overweening; let the state of Roman majesty withdraw. My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built! This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails. But since by reason of my sins I have betaken myself to this desert which lies between Syria and the uncivilized waste, I cannot, owing to the great distance between us, always ask of your sanctity the holy thing of the Lord. Consequently I here follow the Egyptian confessors who share your faith, and anchor my frail craft under the shadow of their great argosies. I know nothing of Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I have nothing to do with Paulinus. He that gathers not with you scatters; he that is not of Christ is of Antichrist."
Jerome, To Pope Damasus, Epistle 15:1-2 (A.D. 375), in NPNF2, VI:18

"But he was not so eager as to lay aside caution. He called the bishop to him, and esteeming that there can be no true thankfulness except it spring from true faith, he enquired whether he agreed with the Catholic bishops, that is, with the Roman Church?"
Ambrose, The death of his brother Satyrus, 1:47(A.D. 37, in NPNF2, X:168

"Your grace must be besought not to permit any disturbance of the Roman Church, the head of the whole Roman World and of the most holy faith of the Apostles, for from thence flow out to all(churches) the bonds of sacred communion."
Ambrose, To Emperor Gratian, Epistle 11:4 (A.D. 381), in SPP, 160

"Or rather, if we hear him here, we shall certainly see him hereafter, if not as standing near him, yet see him we certainly shall, glistening near the Throne of the king. Where the Cherubim sing the glory, where the Seraphim are flying, there shall we see Paul, with Peter, and as a chief and leader of the choir of the Saints, and shall enjoy his generous love. For if when here he loved men so, that when he had the choice of departing and being with Christ, he chose to be here, much more will he there display a warmer affection. I love Rome even for this, although indeed one has other grounds for praising it, both for its greatness, and its antiquity, and its beauty, and its populousness, and for its power, and its wealth, and for its successes in war. But I let all this pass, and esteem it blessed on this account, that both in his lifetime he wrote to them, and loved them so, and talked with them whiles he was with us, and brought his life to a close there. Wherefore the city is more notable upon this ground, than upon all others together. And as a body great and strong, it hath as two glistening eyes the bodies of these Saints. Not so bright is the heaven, when the sun sends forth his rays, as is the city of Rome, sending out these two lights into all parts of the world. From thence will Paul be caught up, from thence Peter. Just bethink you, and shudder (frixate) at the thought of what a sight Rome will see, when Paul ariseth suddenly from that deposit, together with Peter, and is lifted up to meet the Lord. (1 Thess. iv. 17.) What a rose will Rome send up to Christ! (Is. xxxv. 1) what two crowns will the city have about it! what golden chains will she be girded with! what fountains possess! Therefore I admire the city, not for the much gold, not for the columns, not for the other display there, but for these pillars of the Church. (1 Cor. xv. 38.) Would that it were now given me to throw myself round (pericuqhnai) the body of Paul, and be riveted to the tomb, and to see the dust of that body that "filled up that which was lacking" after "Christ" Col. i. 24), that bore "the marks" (stigmata,) (Gal. vi. 17) that sowed the Gospel everywhere yea, the dust of that body through which he ran to and fro everywhere!"
Chrysostom, Epistle to the Romans, Homily 32:24 (c.A.D. 391), in NPNF1, XI:561-562

"Number the bishops from the See of Peter itself. And in that order of Fathers see who has succeeded whom. That is the rock against which the gates of hell do not prevail"
Augustine, Psalm against the Party of Donatus, 18 (A.D. 393), in GCC, 51

"I am held in the communion of the Catholic Church by...and by the succession of bishops from the very seat of Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection commended His sheep to be fed up to the present episcopate."
Augustine, Against the Letter of Mani, 5 (A.D. 395), in GCC, 78

"Carthage was also near the countries over the sea, and distinguished by illustrious renown,so that it had a bishop of more than ordinary influence, who could afford to disregard a number of conspiring enemies because he saw himself joined by letters of communion to the Roman Church, in which the supremacy of an apostolic chair has always flourished"
Augustine, To Glorius et.al, Epistle 43:7 (A.D. 397), in NPNF1, I:278

"If the lineal succession of bishops is to be considered with how much more benefit to the Church do we reckon from Peter himself,to whom, as bearing in a figure the whole Church, the Lord said: Upon this rock I will build my church,and the gates of hell shall not conquer it!' For to Peter succeeded Linus,Clement...Damsus,Sircius,Anastasius. In this order of sucession no Donatist bishop is too be found."
Augustine, To Generosus, Epistle 53:2 (A.D. 400), in GILES, 180-181

The claim of apostolicity of the Catholic Church and the see of Peter (i.e., Rome) holds primacy above all other sees are supported by facts. Â*How could you ever miss that?

[dacs]

Just a help to anyone interested, click the link below:

Catholic Home Study Service

Shalom.

[MrBiddle]

samoka oi! ;-b

[HoundedbyHeaven]

Ayaw nalang kay di jed ma trace....

Wishful thinking.

and if you look at what prophecy has to say about ancient history it only says that Rome will evolve into a tyrannical faction (in an eccelesiastical sense) and corrupt the whole of the earth (Dan. 7: 23) (Rev. 17: 5)

Babylon
Medo-Persia
Greece
Rome

and we are still waiting for the 5th and final kingdom.

If you're not SDA, then you're worse for ripping off their most cherished anti-Catholic theology.

Peter did NOT unloose his authority to anyone else, unlike Judas who was accursed hence Peter said May another take his service, but Peter on the other hand was not accursed so he carried on his role of apostleship and presbyter onto completion til death.

I trust the encyclopedias far more on the subject of papal succession. But it is interesting to note that when St. Peter declared that someone should succeed the Iscariot, not one of the ten opposed.

And as for the allegation that only accursed apostles can be succeeded while unaccursed ones are not, we must be reminded to ask two questions: where does it say only accursed apostles can be succeeded and where does it say that unaccursed apostles cannot be succeeded? Even the idea of a person of authority so unaccursed that no one can succeed him is unheard of, either in the Bible or in real life.

Was he a vicar of Christ? He only referred to himself as a fellow elder - 1 Pet. 5: 1

Same line of reasoning with the INCs, Muslims and those who deny the Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ: Was the Lord Jesus "God", He only referred to Himself as the "Son of Man"?

Who is the Chief Cornerstone?

1 Cor. 3: 11
Eph. 2: 20
Deut. 32: 4, 15
1 Pet. 2: 4 - 8 (and in context of Matt. 16: 18 who are the "living stones" or the "rocks" that make up the Spiritual temple or "building" of the Lord?)

Hey, no argument: The Lord Jesus is the chief cornerstone, but St. Simon is still "the rock" upon which the Lord Jesus built His church-- the Catholic Church. It's a "both...and" condition, not an "either...or".

[mannyamador]

God himself decided the Canon through the church he founded (1 Tim 3: 15, Eph. 3: 10 ) because God's Word is truth (Jn 17: 17, Ps. 119: 160 ) and the church is the pillar and foundation of truth. But that was long before there was ever a Bible printed.

But that doesn't make Peter the first Pope or the RCC the "One True mystical Body" not long after, the falling away began and the powers of the RCC began to preach what wasn't in the documents

If so, then please name me the Church that Christ founded? It is thoroughly absurd to assume that the Church that Christ Himself founded should be lost, because He explicitly said it could not be ("the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it"). So if that Church exists, then why can you not name a single Church that can trace its lineage to it?

Get your history straight. It is ONLY the Catholic Church that can claim the following:

• A direct, unbroken line of authority passed on from the Apostles to the the present
  bishops and the Pope. No other Church can even come close to making such a claim.
  
• Consistent doctrine from that of the Aposltes to the present. There is not a single Catholic
  dogma that has ever been reversed by the Church. In contrast, many of the other christian
  churches have been reversing themselves on doctrinal issues many times over.

I maintain, Tyndale's English translation was the first that came out of Guttenburg's machine

That is being obstinate. To maintain a position despite contrary evidence being presented is irrational, arrogant, and actually stupid. There's no way to have a rational discussion with such a bigot.

Now let's see some of the evidence that proves you wrong from non-catholic sources [emphasis added]:

Gutenberg Bible
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Gutenberg Bible (also known as the 42-line Bible, and as the Mazarin Bible)
is a print of the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible that was printed by its
namesake, Johann Gutenberg, in Mainz, Germany using moveable type,
mass-produced starting on February 23, 1455. This Bible is the most famous
incunabulum and its production marked the beginning of the mass production
of books in the West.

Here are two more from Protestant sources:

http://www.biblesociety.com.au/BS/Bi...rintbible.html
Gutenberg began by printing several small Latin grammars and materials on single
sheets. The Latin Bible was the first work of substantial size to be printed. This vast
undertaking occupied him from 1450 to 1456.

and

http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/81.htm
Gutenburg invented the printing press in the 1450's, and the first book to ever be printed
was the Bible. It was, however, in Latin rather than English.

Still insist Tyndale's Bible was the first to be printed? Maybe you think the world is flat too.

And it's as if the RCC doesn't practice polygamy, a dangerous abomination. The mediation of the dulia and hyperdulia is an outright denial of the all-sufficient Mediation of Christ.

Not only are you ignorant of history, you are obviously just as ignorant of the doctrines you are attacking. That is PREJUDICE.

Good grief, if you can't even get a simply historical fact like what Bible was first printed, I am not the least bit surprised you cannot even begin to grasp the doctrines you attack! Truly that is BLIND PREJUDICE!

[Sovabon]

If you're not SDA, then you're worse for ripping off their most cherished anti-Catholic theology.

What? SDA is only following what is written in the Bible. And you know what? Your trusted Catholic Defender has many SDA Books as his references. That is why, he wont make debate with the SDAs. He give respects so much with the SDAs and so with the SDAs to him.

[MrBiddle]

If so, then please name me the Church that Christ founded? It is thoroughly absurd to assume that the Church that Christ Himself founded should be lost, because He explicitly said it could not be ("the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it"). So if that Church exists, then why can you not name a single Church that can trace its lineage to it?

Israel of God. - Gal. 6: 16

[HoundedbyHeaven]

What? SDA is only following what is written in the Bible. And you know what? Your trusted Catholic Defender has many SDA Books as his references. That is why, he wont make debate with the SDAs. He give respects so much with the SDAs and so with the SDAs to him.

Who? Dacs, mannyamador, s.n.m.p., whiteoleander?

Anyway, just because I have respect for other non-Catholics doesn't mean I won't debate them-- especially the anti-Catholics of the S.D.A. and anyone who embraces their anti-Catholic beliefs and spews their anti-Catholic propaganda. Nothing gets into my nerve than calling my Mother "puttana"...

My line in the sand.

Pax Vobis Cum!