Catholicism versus Protestantism down the centuries

TOPIC SYNOPSIS I could summarize my basic belief this way:Jesus always existed and will always exist. He is Gods human character---the way that God chose to commune and relate with humans. My entire conceptualization of God is seen through this lens of belief. jar and I often argued whether GOD (Creator of all seen and unseen) cared more for humans than He did for pond scum, life on other planets, or dolphins. My response was that through Jesus Christ, humans were able to communicate with GOD> (Yes, I am a Trinitarian) The first group of people ---the upper room bunch in the Book Of Acts---knew Jesus as a human and also knew GOD through Jesus and later through the Holy Spirit. It is my understanding that after the events recorded in Acts and during the time that the letters of Paul were written (After Saul got knocked off his high horse and realized that Jesus was God) the early church was slowly being established. Initially, the early church leadership and hierarchy focused on five cities. Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria. see Wiki article on PentarchyThe split in 1066 drove four of the cities towards Eastern Orthodoxy and Rome became the political/Catholic seat of the church that dominated Europe. At this point, the question arises of the church as a political/business entity versus the church as the called out ecclesia---those who are called out of this world into a spiritual communion with God. Some critics argue that we all are "saved" and/or aware of basic common sense, history, and philosophical musings over God....while others insist that only some people have the awareness of God (Trinitarian version) through a personal daily relationship with Jesus Christ through the living and ever present Holy Spirit. I tend towards the latter belief, though I see valid arguments concerning the former. I suppose that I could be guilty of a similar charge.A: Those who knew Jesus had the Holy Spirit. They were all killed for their beliefs back in those days.

​

B. Nefarious church leaders (all Catholics initially) became more interested in political power, politics and living a heathen life than they did fasting, praying, and loving thy neighbor (especially the heathens of color) and only a remnant had the communion with God. here is where I see us today......C. There is still a remnant (10% perhaps) of individuals who love God with all of their heart---and who although human and fallible, are carried by Gods Grace as they continue to interact with the world and in their attempts to spread the good news about salvation through Christ alone. Some of them are formal Pastors and teachers within the church, though most are people who simply live their calling out on a daily basis while they have secular jobs and tasks.

​

I will admit that my position precludes the necessity of knowing God and loving God and that my belief assumes Christian Trinitarianism to be the way to go. Im likely partially wrong on this belief, but in any event I believe that God draws us to Himself so that I don't worry about the details of historical accuracy. I do believe that we humans need communion and that there is but one God. as the cliche goes, its not about religion---its about a personal relationship.

Nah. They let me join the Illuminati without it.If you're going to take it on yourself to teach everyone history, you bear the responsibility to know and account for real history. Your tale of Protestant Jedis doing battle with Catholic Siths in a galaxy of non-existent Orthodox might make for an entertaining Sunday School matinee, but as history it's strictly kid stuff.

Then I second the motion. It would be interesting to see someone try to trace that.My bet is that we'll get Golden Age myth rather than history. The early church will be a time when everyone pooped ice cream. Then the bad Catholic-ish guys will take over from the good Protestant-ish guys (while the Eastern Orthodox are ignored) and on we'll go from there.That's my bet. But I'm always willing to see low expectations exceeded.

I never claimed a "Golden Age," so why should I have to show one. That's Archer's myth.Nobody says the early church was perfect, only that it was still Christian. The Roman Church starting growing in power until they declared the Pope universal potentate over all the churches in 606. Meanwhile there WERE true Christian groups that stayed outside of the Roman institution, recognizing it as Antichrist even from that early period, such as the Waldensians and the Albigensians, whom the RCC tracked down and murdered from time to time, calling them "heretics." Nobody says their doctrine was perfect but it WAS Christian, unlike the RCC which is pagan to the core with a thin veneer of Christianity which keeps the people in line, and even that veneer is wearing awfully thin with this new Pope. Consider the trappings of the RCC: the elaborate robes, the crown or tiara the Pope wears, the "mitre" head thing that is shaped like a fish head, such expensive stuff that has nothing whatever to do with Christ but everything to do with Roman paganism. The name "pontiff" also comes from the head of the pagan Roman religion. Their doctrines are an amazing list of sins against the scriptures: the very existence of a priesthood for starters but then also the celibacy of the priesthood, which of course has contributed to their amazing history of sexual sins by priests and popes, keeping mistresses and visiting prostitutes, also to the current scandal of the molestation of children, both male and female. The doctr8ines of transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, "veneration" of Mary, insisting she remained a virgin although married which would be a violation of the marriage covenant, calling her born sinless like Christ, making her intercessor between the laity and Him, though He is said in scripture to be our only Intercessor and we are to "come boldly to the throne of grace," not through Mary or anybody; oh a long long list of completely NONChristian and even Antichristian doctrines could be made.The Eastern Orthodox Church was the eastern wing of the church, centered in Byzantium (Constantinople), until they refused to obey the demand from Rome that they submit to the Roman Pope, which led them to split into the Eastern Orthodox church, which is the state church of Russia among other things. They are basically quite similar to the Roman Church, but they never had the power the Roman Church had.I know your feelings are hurt but the Jesuits were known by many in history as the most evil organization on the planet, until all that got whitewashed due to their own efforts in the twentieth century (Don't trust anything written on this subject after about 1920). They are dedicated to power, not religion (Napoleon was one who said that about them), to the ends justifying the means, to murdering anyone who gets in their way, including Popes, (one of whom got himself poisoned for denouncing them and even knew he was going to be murdered for it) it was they who brought the Inquisition to the level of an efficient machine of tyranny, torture and murder of tens of millions); they are dedicated to promoting the power interests of the papacy (though not particular Popes), to subverting governments to their own aims, and to keeping as low a profile as possible in all these efforts. Voltaire mentioned that in his time there had already been --I think he actually said -- thousands of books denouncing them. Our second President John Adams wrote against them, and I can find more of this information later.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I thought we had stomped a mudhole into this particular paranoid rant. Apparently not...You don't have to wait for Faith to post hate filed diatribes about the Jesuits. Just type 'evil Jesuits' into any search engine and you can find this crap yourself.This thread was opened because Faith claimed she had evidence and not just stories. But like all Faith's threads, evidence supporting her position seems as visible as hens' teeth.But yes you can read how the Jesuits were behind the assassinations of Lincoln and Kennedy, how there is a secret 'Black Pope' that gives orders to Pope Francis, how the Jesuits inspired Himmler, how they invented Spanish Fly, etc.Remove the word 'evil' from your search and you get a completely different picture. But don't let that stop you from hating. 'Tis what haters do.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Are you truly an idiot or do you just like pretending you are. Do I really have to explain this to you? Do you have any reading comprehension skills? Your whole argument is that there was a a pre-RCC golden age of Christianity. Just because you don't use those words does not mean that your argument is not thus. And of course you and the nutballs you follow get to define what is a true christian. How convenient. Maybe you should present a definition of pagan. Because I am quite sure you must have some sort of super secret Faith definition that no one else uses. Please show that this was part of Roman "paganism". OH you're right, gee how did I not see it. This means, gee I guess it means.. absolutely....nothing. Yes and you get to decide what is christian doctrine. How do you sustain with some much responsibility? Like all you arguments, utterly simplistic. This was one of many things that caused the schism. They were different churches and hierarchies well before the final formal split. You might want to research things like the Filioque clause and the huge political, social and cultural issues between the latin and greek societies. It amazes me how you have the hubris to think you are more knowledgeable then the worlds best scholars. Everything have posted about the Jesuits on this thread has been shown to be lies and bullshit. Love to see your evidence for this. I need a very good laugh. The Dominicans were the inquisition. Also, most of the Inquisition was not under the direct control of the church. The spanish and portuguese inqusisitions actually operated under Royal authority. All of the trials and executions were secular affairs. Millions were not killed during the inquisitions. Modern scholarship shows less than 10,000 executed by the Spanish Inquisition. Probably closer to 3000.Sources
Monter, William (1990). Frontiers of Heresy. The Spanish Inquisition from the Basque Land to Sicily. Cambridge University Press p. 53
Perez, Joseph (2006) The Spanish Inquisition: A History, Yale University Press. pp 170-173 Oh and do you support all of Volatires views. Do you have any idea what he thought of the bible or his advocacy of separation of church and state. SO?Were the Jesuits choirboys? No. Were some of them and some of the things the order did pretty bad? Yes.
Does this mean they are some sort of evil underground force killing and subjugating millions. No.Faith you need evidence. Hearsay and wacky conspiracy theories is not evidence.

Only until Disney and Walmart.

I agree with the fictional character Jesus.

So the Waldensians and Albigensians are 'true Christians', you say, because they stayed independent of the papacy, even though their doctrine was 'not perfect'. OK. So Catholic Christians are 'pagan to the core', you say, even though they worship Jesus, because their doctrines are just too imperfect. Among the inexcusably imperfect doctrines you name are celibacy and the wearing of unattractive hats. OK. So even though Eastern Orthodox believers remained independent of the Rome just as the Waldensians and the Albigensians did, and even though they do not require celibacy of their clergy, they get no credit for being 'true Christians' because their funny hats and imperfect doctrines make them 'quite similar to the Roman Church' regardless. OK. So if people in post-Revolutionary France say bad things about a person, that person must be bad. And taking a vow renouncing the pursuit of powerful stations (as Jesuits do) means you are 'dedicated to power.' OK.___Well, Faith. your summary of early Christian history certainly presents us with a lot to, um, digest. Please answer a few questions that remain open despite your enlightening narrative.1. Define 'true Christian'.2. Describe the difference between an excusable 'imperfect doctrine' and an inexcusable imperfect doctrine.3. Describe the process by which you personally arrived at perfect doctrine.4. Explain why the Waldensians and Albigensians get points for remaining independent of Rome but Orthodox Christians don't.5. Describe how we may distinguish between people who pray to Jesus and are 'true Christians' from people who pray to Jesus and are 'pagan to the core'.6. Explain what makes the Russian Orthodox Church the 'state church of Russia' when Russia has no state church.7. Explain how the people in the early church were able to be 'true Christians' when the epistles describe them as altering the Eucharist beyond recognition, requiring the observance of Jewish customs, disagreeing about holy days, marrying multiple spouses, eating 'meat sacrificed to idols', conducting chaotic meetings, doubting some of their teachers could be true apostles, quoting apocryphal literature as authoritative, holding mystic ideas that denied Yeshua a bodily resurrection or even a body at all, and saying things like 'faith without works is dead'?8. Please explain why celibacy makes one 'pagan to the core' if Yeshua himself was celibate, and Paul of Tarsus not only lived a celibate lifestyle but recommended it to anyone who took their beliefs seriously.9. Please explain why Jesuits are evil for (as you describe it) persecuting 'pagan to the core' popes, but Martin Luther remains a 'true Christian' despite his desire to persecute Jews.10. Explain what Waldensians and the Albigensians have to do with Protestantism when Protestantism did not exist at the time and their doctrines did not align with a Protestant understanding of doctrine.Thanks.Edited by Archer Opteryx, : clarityEdited by Archer Opteryx, : siggyEdited by Archer Opteryx, : tinkering

Wait ... Napoleon accused someone of being dedicated to power? That's the most hypocritical complaint since the great pot/kettle controversy.

Faith tells us the Jesuits are shadowy assassins, sex-crazed fiends, and diabolical power-mad murderers.Well... nobody's perfect. But it's only fair to mention that they also have a catchy college song.

The "not perfect" is an objection to the idea of a "Golden Age" which is some kind of ridiculous idea of your own. They were basically Bible believers who knew Rome was on the wrong track. I'm not talking about "Catholic Christians" I'm talking about the papacy and official RCC doctrine, and they deon't worship Jesus. In case you haven't noticed the Popes worship "Mary." They pray to "her," they avidly follow the "messages" of "her" apparitions and so on. To their doctrinal paganism I could add indulgences, fish on Friday, although I guess that has gone out, the Mass which is blasphemy, prayers to saints, prayers to "Mary," and give me time I'll think of more. The average Catholic may or may not be a Christian but if they are they should get out of that institution. The funny hats all by themselves show an unchristian spirit, but as I understand it most of the Eastern doctrines are the same as the RCC. Voltaire was meant to be an example for crying out loud. There are hundreds of people who denounced the Jesuits, many of them Catholics too. I just thought Voltaire might be more believable than a Protestant. Takes the Bible as the final authority, believes in salvation by faith in Christ alone through God's grace, nothing added. RCC doctrines are extraBiblical, imperfect Christians may get some things wrong about their Biblical doctrine but they ARE Bible believers, believing that the Bible is the sole authority, and they believe in salvation by faith in Christ alone through God's grace, nothing added. I'm sure I make some doctrinal errors but the Bible is my sole authority and I believe in salvation by faith alone in Christ alone through grace alone. I am blessed to have found good teachers and good books. I spent a long time sorting through religions and then through various "Christian" books before I boiled it down to Reformation Bible Protestantism. Because they don't share in the errors of the RCC that the Orthodox do. I refer you to the list of RCC unbiblical doctrines. If a Catholic or anyone prays only to Jesus and trusts Him only for salvation they are probably Christians. If they also pray to "Mary" or other "saints" and pay for prayers for the dead and all that, they are probably not Christian. There are Catholics who think Mary saves them. Take it in the casual sense. ABE: Or cultural sense; they are strongly identified with Russian nationalism. /ABE No way I can discuss such a dense list of unidentifiable accusations. It's compulsory, not voluntary. Scriptures describe the bearers of false doctrine as "forbidding to marry." He rightly objected to their blasphemous doctrines and still thought enough like a Catholic to want to sic the state on them for it. The Protestant Reformers, after finally getting themselves freed as much as possible from Roman influence, recognized those groups as genuine Christians, as precursors of the Reformation, that had been persecuted and murdered by the RCC. You're welcome. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

"Takes one to know one."

I didn't say they were sex crazed fiends, that's the popes down through history, and the priests in general, not particularly the Jesuits if at all. They are power crazed not sex crazed. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So 'tis said, but if that rule was actually true I'd be a giraffe wearing a bow tie.