newbornmacho:

Blasphemy

Because you say so?

The Jews said so too...but they were the blasphemers.

shadeyinka:


I assume you are Catholic, therefore if your information is contrary spill it out

You assume wrong.

MZLady39:
No they were not.

Then who were the early xtians.

shadeyinka:


My point is really not about canonisation of the scriptures but against seeing Catholicism as the "Original" church. Like I said before, the issue is like:



Catholic church started when a fusion of the State and the church commenced.

Have you ever wondered why the Robes worn by the Catholic Priests didn't have any Jewish fashion style? It was influenced mainly by the Roman fashion.. No relic of how Pope Peter used to dress...

Catholic started when the church of Christ had a large influx of government money

But canonisation of scriptures is pertinent especially as you've conferred all authority in Christian matters away from the church onto to bible.

I'm also curious as to how you became familiar with Jewish fashion and roman fashions of antiquity. How do you know that priestly garb is not similar to Jewish priestly garb?

Following your reasoning... Jesus didn't start Christianity. After all we know when it started. Christianity started in Antioch where the term was first coined.

Mcowubaba:
Early Christians weren't Catholics.
The were just Christians, no denomination, no silly doctrine, no pope.
What happened in the early church was Gathering of believers to worship and praise God.

Jesus was not/never a Catholic..
In fact what Catholics do is not what Jesus Christ wants.
Catholics are on their own, same with dozens of other denomination.
Every one is practicing Christianity to suit their own desires, man made doctrine and idealogy
Very few true Christians

shadeyinka:


My point is really not about canonisation of the scriptures but against seeing Catholicism as the "Original" church. Like I said before, the issue is like:

Since you have suddenly bolted from DoctorAlien's concoction, let us wait for him to answer.

shadeyinka:


Catholic church started when a fusion of the State and the church commenced.

When was this?

shadeyinka:

Have you ever wondered why the Robes worn by the Catholic Priests didn't have any Jewish fashion style? It was influenced mainly by the Roman fashion.. No relic of how Pope Peter used to dress...

How do you know?

shadeyinka:

Catholic started when the church of Christ had a large influx of government money

When?

PastorAIO:

Following your reasoning... Jesus didn't start Christianity. After all we know when it started. Christianity started in Antioch where the term was first coined.

Shadeyinka, according to your reasoning, would you agree that Jesus didnt start Christianity?

DoctorAlien:
The Old Testament was written by God's inspired prophets, patriarchs, psalmists, judges, and kings.
It was faithfully copied and preserved by Jewish scribes. Modern Protestant Bibles have the same content as the Hebrew Bible. The New Testament was written by Christian apostles. None of them were Catholics, because there was no Roman Catholic Church at the time. This was over two centuries before Constantine's "conversion". The early Church did not have the New Testament as we know it. Rather, individuals and local congregations had portions of it. They would
have one or more of the Gospels, some of the letters which Apostles had written, and perhaps the Book of Acts or the Book of Revelation.

2. You claim the Catholic Church changed the
Bible by adding the 'Apocryphal' books in 1548.
But those apocryphal books were listed in the 397AD Council of Carthage's Canon, which you claim was an identification of the canon that existed already.
So which one is true.

newbornmacho:

Blasphemy

So protestanism didnt begin in d 1500s? what is d blasphemy or is that ur favorite exclamation?

Mcowubaba:
Early Christians weren't Catholics.
The were just Christians, no denomination, no silly doctrine, no pope.
What happened in the early church was Gathering of believers to worship and praise God.

there was doctrine and the church had leaders with d bishop of rome as primate but no denominations, protestants began tha abberation.

Jesus was not/never a Catholic..
In fact [b]what Catholics do is not what Jesus Christ wants.

u know this because...?

Catholics are on their own, same with dozens of other denomination.
Every one is practicing Christianity to suit their own desires, man made doctrine and idealogy[b]
Very few true Christians

i guess u count urself among d few christians abi?

Ubenedictus:
there was doctrine and the church had leaders with d bishop of rome as primate but no denominations, protestants began tha abberation.

u know this because...?
i guess u count urself among d few christians abi?

The Church had leaders not a Bishop in the time of the Apostles, after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Jesus Christ was never a Catholic and can't be a Catholic, bring any Bible scripture that backs up ur claim..

Jesus Christ was sent by God to save and redeem the world from condemnation, I don't know when HE became a Catholic member

Jesus Christ is the Savior nd not a Catholic member..
Catholic denomination is MAN MADE, not DIVINE, Jesus Christ is DIVINE, know the difference..
Don't personalise Jesus Christ to the Catholic Church, that would be blasphemy.

Jesus Christ is Lord over all, and came as a MORTAL (not as a Catholic) to save ALL

I don't count myself as amongst the few Christians, in fact I'm more LOGICAL than RELIGIOUS.
You can carry the title of *Christian* that's your business, I'm not interested

All I know is that both Catholics and many other denominations are serving themselves not GOD.

PastorAIO:

Following your reasoning... Jesus didn't start Christianity. After all we know when it started. Christianity started in Antioch where the term was first coined.

Oga, I never opined that Jesus Christ didn't start Christianity.
What is even Christianity - the name Christianity/Christian was given to "Followers of Jesus Christ" by unbelievers, it was like a nick name..

When they (unbelievers) saw people practicing Jesus Christ's teaching, principles, ways etc they said see this people doing like Christ, that's the origin of the name Christianity. (Go and read Acts 11:25-27) observe closely what happened in Antioch.


Christian simply means Christ like, follower of Christ..
Go and read the Etymology of Christianity.
So it would be insane for anyone to argue that Christianity wasn't started by Jesus Christ.

Just like APC followers/supporters are called Zombie, while PDP supporters are called wailers.

Catholics worship Mary and pray to her. Mary is mortal..
She can't answer your prayers or request.

italo:


1. Who then created this canon that already existed?

2. You claim the Catholic Church changed the Bible by adding the 'Apocryphal' books in 1548. But those apocryphal books were listed in the 397AD Council of Carthage's Canon, which you claim was an identification of the canon that existed already.

The many churches in the parts of the then-known world had copies of one or more of the NT epistles, Gospels and maybe the book of Revelations. These books of the New Testament were generally held as Scripture then and were used by the churches. This was sixty years before the formation of the catholic church in 314 A.D. The catholic church simply gathered in the council of Carthage to agree that all those books were regarded as canon by concensus of use were canon.

The catholic church added apocrypha the Bible in the council of Trent(1548), simply because they seem to support their unbiblical practices.

italo:


Shadeyinka, according to your reasoning, would you agree that Jesus didnt start Christianity?

In the real sense, Jesus didn't start Christianity: He was the nucleus/the focus of what is called Christianity.

Apart from teaching the Believers a model prayer, Jesus didn't focus on religion: He focused on men having a relationship with the Father.

Christianity is the Religious aspect of the "Relationship" He paid the price for us to have.

Except being a "christian" is enough to take one to heaven.

Without Jesus, there would be no religion called Christianity and of cause no group of people called "little Christ's"

italo:

Since you have suddenly bolted from DoctorAlien's concoction, let us wait for him to answer.
When was this?


How do you know?


When?

Check historical records and jewish culture

PastorAIO:



But canonisation of scriptures is pertinent especially as you've conferred all authority in Christian matters away from the church onto to bible.

I'm also curious as to how you became familiar with Jewish fashion and roman fashions of antiquity. How do you know that priestly garb is not similar to Jewish priestly garb?

Canonization of the scripture is NOT the same as authoring the scriptures. You will agree with me that the books of the new testament were in circulation among the churches and a time came (much later) to prevent heresies from creeping in the books had to be canonised.

If canonisation didn't happen, maybe the New testament would have contained so much fabrications.

Have you heard of the book called "the Gospel according to Barnabas"?

About Fashion, check traditional Jewish dresses. The information is available..google is your friend

Interestingly, l grew up with an "Art Historian": too many books with pictures to read

Ubenedictus:
2. You claim the Catholic Church changed the
Bible by adding the 'Apocryphal' books in 1548.
But those apocryphal books were listed in the 397AD Council of Carthage's Canon, which you claim was an identification of the canon that existed already.
So which one is true.

The apocryphal books were not canon before 397 A.D. going by concensus of use. And since the catholic church only gathered in the council of Carthage simply to recognize as canon those books which were already canon by concensus of use, we know then that the apocryphal books were not even thought of in that council.

I know. I know. I know how the catholic church can manufacture forged documents as evidence to support their lies. So, don't even bother showing me any evidence of the council of Carthage listing the apocryphal books as canon.

PastorAIO:


You assume wrong.

Forgive my assumption. You actually sound like one

DoctorAlien:


The apocryphal books were not canon before 397 A.D. going by concensus of use. And since the catholic church only gathered in the council of Carthage simply to recognize as canon those books which were already canon by concensus of use, we know then that the apocryphal books were not even thought of in that council.

I know. I know. I know how the catholic church can manufacture forged documents as evidence to support their lies. So, don't even bother showing me any evidence of the council of Carthage listing the apocryphal books as canon.

What do you mean by "you know the church can manufacture forged documents",you guys are just anti-catholic fanatics.
Have you ever worked with the church in any means( diocesan or vatican) and they gave you forged documents? Have you?Going by your argument that means the Bible is a forged document . Is it?

italo:


Not just several hundred years older. The Catholic Church started at Pentecost. It is one true Church.

The List of Popes

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I
St. Telesphorus (125-136)
St. Hyginus (136-140)
St. Pius I (140-155)
St. Anicetus (155-166)
St. Soter (166-175)
St. Eleutherius (175-189)
St. Victor I (189-199)
St. Zephyrinus (199-217)

Read about all those men and stop displaying your ignorance so proudly in public.

So because believers were called Christians by unbelievers, it means the Church could not call itself "Catholic Church" a few years later. If followers of Christ can adopt a name given by enemies, why should it be impossible to you that they adopt a name by themselves?


The geographical area called Nigeria today never existed as one people, one government, one country, before 1914. The Church that was later called "Catholic Church" is the same one that existed as one body of believers, with one leader (Peter), one heirarchy, one tradition, one faith, in the New Testament.

If you insist that the Catholic origin is like Nigeria's, Nigeria came about 1914, tell us when the Catholic Church came about.

Intersting read:
However, you always contrast Catholic vs Protestant and this prevent you from seeing that you did not invent history.

Permit me to paste this from Wikipedia:

he history of the Orthodox Church is traced back to Jesus Christ and the Apostles. The Apostles appointed successors, known as bishops, and they in turn appointed other bishops in a process known as Apostolic succession. Over time, five Patriarchates were established to organize the Christian world, and four of these ancient Patriarchates remain Orthodox today. Orthodox Christianity reached its present form in Late Antiquity (in the period from the 3rd to the 8th century), when the Ecumenical Councils were held, doctrinal disputes were resolved, the Fathers of the Church lived and wrote, and Orthodox worship practices settled into their permanent form (including the liturgies and the major holidays of the Church).

In the early Middle Ages, Orthodox missionaries spread Christianity towards the north, to the Bulgarians, Serbs, Russians and others. Meanwhile, a gradual process of estrangement took place between the four Eastern Patriarchates and the Latin Church of Rome, culminating with the Great Schism in the 11th century, in which Orthodoxy and the Latin Church (later called the Roman Catholic Church) separated from each other. In the Late Middle Ages, the Fall of Constantinople brought a large part of the world's Orthodox Christians under Ottoman Turkish rule. Nevertheless, Orthodoxy continued to flourish in Russia, as well as within the Ottoman Empire among the latter's Christian subject peoples. As the Ottoman Empire declined in the 19th century and several majority-Orthodox nations regained their independence, they organized a number of new autocephalous Orthodox churches in Southern and Eastern Europe.

Four stages of development can be distinguished in the history of the Orthodox Church. Early Christianity, which represents the first three centuries through the early age of Constantine the Great, constitutes the Apostolic and ancient period. The Byzantine period, beginning with the time of the Ecumenical Councils, comprises over eleven centuries from the First Council of Nicaea in 325 to the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. The Ottoman period starts, approximately, for the Greek and Balkan communities in the fifteenth century with the Fall of Constantinople, and ends about the year 1830, which marks Greek and Serbian independence from the Ottoman Empire. The last stage is the modern period.

The Orthodox jurisdictions with the largest number of adherents in modern times are the Russian, the Ethiopian, and the Romanian Orthodox churches. The most ancient of the Orthodox communities existing today are the churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, Armenia, Georgia, and Ethiopia.[1][2][3]

So, you can see that your historical records could be biased.

Are the Orthodox Christians under the authority of the Pope?
If they are not Catholics, then your dispute should be with the Orthodox Christians.

Are you Shadeyinka?

Oops! Na you even write the post wey I respond to. Okay, now using your own same reasoning consider this:

Catholic just means universal therefore Catholic Church spread out over the earth like 'Kingdom of heaven' that Jesus described.
Christian means Christ follower. Bcatholic means universal. These two words are not mutually exclusive.

Mcowubaba:

The Church had leaders not a Bishop in the time of the Apostles, after Jesus ascended into heaven.

Jesus Christ was never a Catholic and can't be a Catholic, bring any Bible scripture that backs up ur claim..

Jesus Christ was sent by God to save and redeem the world from condemnation, I don't know when HE became a Catholic member

Jesus Christ is the Savior nd not a Catholic member..
Catholic denomination is MAN MADE, not DIVINE, Jesus Christ is DIVINE, know the difference..
Don't personalise Jesus Christ to the Catholic Church, that would be blasphemy.

Jesus Christ is Lord over all, and came as a MORTAL (not as a Catholic) to save ALL

I don't count myself as amongst the few Christians, in fact I'm more LOGICAL than RELIGIOUS.
You can carry the title of *Christian* that's your business, I'm not interested

All I know is that both Catholics and many other denominations are serving themselves not GOD.


Oga, I never opined that Jesus Christ didn't start Christianity.
What is even Christianity - the name Christianity/Christian was given to "Followers of Jesus Christ" by unbelievers, it was like a nick name..

When they (unbelievers) saw people practicing Jesus Christ's teaching, principles, ways etc they said see this people doing like Christ, that's the origin of the name Christianity. (Go and read Acts 11:25-27) observe closely what happened in Antioch.


Christian simply means Christ like, follower of Christ..
Go and read the Etymology of Christianity.
So it would be insane for anyone to argue that Christianity wasn't started by Jesus Christ.

Just like APC followers/supporters are called Zombie, while PDP supporters are called wailers.

Catholics worship Mary and pray to her. Mary is mortal..
She can't answer your prayers or request.

shadeyinka:


Forgive my assumption. You actually sound like one

No wahala! Sebi they are human beings too.

Ubenedictus:
My dear,

If you do not wish to discuss, you can simply skip my post. I dislike you snarky comments.

To ur question, yes d early apostles did wear robes, and seminaries exist today for catholic d same way bible school exist for protestant, because it is more in tune with how education works today.

If u are going to post ur snarky comments please skip this post.

You needn't get upset by the statement quoted.

The early Apostles never put on the kind of robes put on by the catholic priests. They wore their normal day to day dress. If Jesus didn't put on a priestly robe, His disciples did not have any reason to.

It would have been illegal for Jesus to even put on the Jewish priestly robes at his time. So, what example would Peter be following.

You should know that the religious ceremonies taken fore granted now were not possible in the catacombs.

A Bishop was supposed to be a husband of one wife ..NOT celebrate. Mybfriend, there is a huge difference.

Pls check out:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Orthodox_Church

PastorAIO:
Are you Shadeyinka?

Oga go to my profile
My moniker is over 4 years old, and I'm very active on Nairaland.

If you have no other logical and sensible argument on this topic, I think you should not quote me again.

Thanks

EDITED... I just read some of Shadeyinka's comments on this topic, we have similar thoughts..
No wonder you got us mixed up
You're FORGIVEN.

I see no correlation of the priestly garb of the roman pagan priests and the priestly garb of the Catholic Church,

There were very many books and letters in circulation amongst early Christians. Canonisation occurred to stop the spread if heresies. I agree. The criteria for selecting books was in tws of their theology/doctrine. Those text whose doctrines were not acceptable to the church were rejected. I think the matter of fabrications mattered less than the matter of doctrine.

shadeyinka:


Canonization of the scripture is NOT the same as authoring the scriptures. You will agree with me that the books of the new testament were in circulation among the churches and a time came (much later) to prevent heresies from creeping in the books had to be canonised.

If canonisation didn't happen, maybe the New testament would have contained so much fabrications.

Have you heard of the book called "the Gospel according to Barnabas"?

About Fashion, check traditional Jewish dresses. The information is available..google is your friend

Interestingly, l grew up with an "Art Historian": too many books with pictures to read

Mcowubaba:


Oga go to my profile
My moniker is over 4 years old, and I'm very active on Nairaland.

If you have no other logical and sensible argument on this topic, I think you should not quote me again.

Thanks

EDITED... I just read some of Shadeyinka's comments on this topic, we have similar thoughts..
No wonder you got us mixed up
You're FORGIVEN.

Please read my post again. It has been amended.

blackbriar:


What do you mean by "you know the church can manufacture forged documents",you guys are just anti-catholic fanatics.
Have you ever worked with the church in any means( diocesan or vatican) and they gave you forged documents? Have you?Going by your argument that means the Bible is a forged document . Is it?

Here is a true Roman Catholic who doesn't know jack about his church and what they can do. He gobbles down whatever he is fed by the priests.

Bro, the Roman Catholic church has forged many documents and writings, and edited countless others, simply to lend credence to whatever lies they've decided to teach their flock. The Catholic encyclopedia even admits these forgeries!

The Donation of Constantine is only one, and a good example, of such forgeries. You can read about the Donation of Constantine on Wikipedia.

DoctorAlien:


The many churches in the parts of the then-known world had copies of one or more of the NT epistles, Gospels and maybe the book of Revelations. These books of the New Testament were generally held as Scripture then and were used by the churches. This was sixty years before the formation of the catholic church in 314 A.D. The catholic church simply gathered in the council of Carthage to agree that all those books were regarded as canon by concensus of use were canon.

Please mention just one of these your "many Churches" that existed before 314AD and provide evidence.

Also, where is your evidence of what you claimed happened at the Council of Carthage? Which books were agreed on at the council?

DoctorAlien:

The catholic church added apocrypha the Bible in the council of Trent(1548), simply because they seem to support their unbiblical practices.

Please provide evidence of this.

Again, the books were already in the bible at the Council of Carthage. If the books were added in 1548 by the Catholic Church, how come the Orthodox Church that had a Schism with the Catholic Church in 1054 have them in their Bible?

You're contradicting yourself simply because you're wrong.

shadeyinka:


In the real sense, Jesus didn't start Christianity: He was the nucleus/the focus of what is called Christianity.

So who started Christianity, and when did it start?

shadeyinka:


Apart from teaching the Believers a model prayer, Jesus didn't focus on religion: He focused on men having a relationship with the Father.

Oh! Only a relationship with the Father and 'Our Father' prayer.

So who built the Church? Who started the idea of baptism, communion? Whose idea was it that one man -
Peter should feed the flock? Who chose 12 men and made them foundation for the kingdom?

shadeyinka:

Christianity is the Religious aspect of the "Relationship" He paid the price for us to have.

When did this religious aspect start?

italo:


Please mention just one of these your "many Churches" that existed before 314AD and provide evidence.

The church in Corinth, the church in Ephesus, the church in Galatia, etc.

Also, where is your evidence of what you claimed happened at the Council of Carthage? Which books were agreed on at the council?
Please provide evidence of this.

Walter A. Elwell, "Evangelical Dictionary of Theology" (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1984), page 141.

Again, the books were already in the bible at the Council of Carthage. If the books were added in 1548 by the Catholic Church, how come the Orthodox Church that had a Schism with the Catholic Church in 1054 have them in their Bible?

We know that the council of Carthage met to recognize properly as canon those books that were already canon by concensus of use. Did Christians even around the time of Origen use the book of Maccabees or Sirach? The answer is NO. So, you have no point.

italo:

So who started Christianity, and when did it start?
Oh! Only a relationship with the Father and 'Our Father' prayer.

So who built the Church? Who started the idea of baptism, communion? Whose idea was it that one

Please, what institution was Jesus referring to in Matthew 18:17

PastorAIO:
I see no correlation of the priestly garb of the roman pagan priests and the priestly garb of the Catholic Church,

There were very many books and letters in circulation amongst early Christians. Canonisation occurred to stop the spread if heresies. I agree. The criteria for selecting books was in tws of their theology/doctrine. Those text whose doctrines were not acceptable to the church were rejected. I think the matter of fabrications mattered less than the matter of doctrine.

There were other factors used to determine if an ancient "church writing" should be canonized.
Like:
1. Can they be traced to the Apostles in authorship?
2. Or were the writings in circulation during the times of the Apostles?
3. Was it written in the lifetime of the generation that saw or moved with Jesus?

Of course there were some heretic teachings too of which the church must be careful not to mix with the holy writ. I believe they did a fairly good job.

PastorAIO:


Please, what institution was Jesus referring to in Matthew 18:17

Greek word is ekklésia which means the assembly.

In proper context, the church as we know it started in the upper room in the book of Acts.