The Roots of Catholicism

[Ray Berrian]

In Alexandria, Egypt during the second century a theological school existed. It rose to prominence under Clement and Origen. Alexandria was steeped in Greek philosophy for almost five centuries. Among the systems of thinking were: Pythagoreanism, Platonism, Aristotelianism and Stoicism.

Two things corrupted Roman Catholicism. The first thing was the allegorical method of interpretation which let an open view toward the interpretation of Scripture. Essentially, the Word of God meant whatever you came up with exegetically speaking. No one is wrong. The second problem was that Augustine was so heavily influenced by these 'isms' that he mixed pagan philosophy with Christian concepts. Among these diluted men were: Philo, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen. 'Origen after his death was disowned by the Church as a heretic. Much of the mysticism of the Alexandrian school of theology was absorbed into Christian thinking.' {New Standard Encyclopedia, 1990 ed., s.v. "Alexandria, Egypt."

Plato was secular philosopher bound for destruction, a homosexual, he believed in socialism, selective breeding, contraception, infanticide and the kidnapping of children from their parents for a twenty year period of state-controlled values clarification. He reclined at wine parties with nude boys serving him. So much for Clement of Alexandria's hero who had "touched on the truth."

Truth coming from the Lord and His Word is pure. Why would the people who made up the foundation stones of Catholicism, drink at so many pagan cisterns?

This is one of the reasons why evangelicals believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture while some Protestants and Catholics allegorize the interpretation of many passages especially all of the Book of Revelation. It all happened in the later 100's B.C. from the intellectual and scientific center of the world called Alexandria.

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
Essentially, the Word of God meant whatever you came up with exegetically speaking.

Baptists call this soul liberty.

It's funny that you make this accusation of the Catholic Church which has one teaching for all the Church.

While your stripe of Christianity forms a new church with unique teachings virtually everyday.

The pastor gave a sermon that you disagree with? Split off into a new church.

This is one of the reasons why evangelicals believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture while some Protestants and Catholics allegorize the interpretation of many passages especially all of the Book of Revelation.

To you John's vision is literal and the words of Jesus are allegorical. (ie: forgiveness of sin, binding and loosing, "This is my Body", etc.)

Your cut and paste job isn't very convincing.

 

[WPutnam]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
This is one of the reasons why evangelicals believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture while some Protestants and Catholics allegorize the interpretation of many passages especially all of the Book of Revelation. It all happened in the later 100's B.C. from the intellectual and scientific center of the world called Alexandria.

OK, if we were to follow your logic, you should then take the following verses literally as well:

Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. (John 6:53-56 Catholic NAB)

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Pillar and Foundation of Truth, the Church. (1 Tim 3:15)

 

[Justified Saint]

Or

See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2:24

Or

Peter (said) to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. Acts 2:38


Or

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Matthew 16:18-19

 

[thessalonian]

Another "infallible" interprutation of History.

I thought Constantine started it all. Some say it started in the middle ages or after the first 7 councils. Others say Ignatius of Antioch started it all. We do know who starte Lutheranism and Calvinism and Hinduism, and Budhism, and Mormonism and the SDA's JW's. We know the roots of non-denominationalism are in the Campbelite movement eventully leading to the non-denominational denominations in the 1950 and 60's. Pentecostals grew out of the Shakers and the Holiness movement. Yet people keep coming out with "theories" about how and when the Catholic Church started. Now Ray has the silver bullet theory and all the rest of them are of course wrong. When are people going to stop revising history to fit their thoughts of what should have happened according to the biases.

"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

Nice try Ray

 

[Lorelei]

Originally posted by WPutnam:
OK, if we were to follow your logic, you should then take the following verses literally as well: Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.

Yes, lets take it literally and realize that I am a literal dead man with no life in me at all. If this is speaking literally, then the breath I breath and the life I live makes the God out to be a liar. If, however, it speaks of spiritual life, then it must be speaking of the spiritual bread and blood and God's Word is proven true, not false.

~Lorelei

 

[A_Christian]

The Church of Rome was Paganized by an influx of NON-CHRISTIANS who wanted to be a part of the NEW STATE RELIGION established by Constantine. Most of the people who infiltrated the church of Rome simply wanted to go where the power was. As soon as they got a foothold they began to paganize that church to suit their OWN tastes.

The gates of hell didn't prevail, and there were soon individuals that GOD called forth and directed to keep the candle of TRUE salvation alive, though rather dim for centuries, until the blaze of the Reformation re-established the WORD
of GOD and not traditions of man as GOD's standard
and CHRIST was re-established as the ROCK that His
CHURCH rested upon in the minds and hearts of men.

So just remember that as you gaze at YOUR statues of Mary and chant as you count your prayer beads. It is ALL pagan and not of GOD.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Another "infallible" interprutation of History.

I thought Constantine started it all. Some say it started in the middle ages or after the first 7 councils. Others say Ignatius of Antioch started it all. We do know who starte Lutheranism and Calvinism and Hinduism, and Budhism, and Mormonism and the SDA's JW's. We know the roots of non-denominationalism are in the Campbelite movement eventully leading to the non-denominational denominations in the 1950 and 60's. Pentecostals grew out of the Shakers and the Holiness movement. Yet people keep coming out with "theories" about how and when the Catholic Church started. Now Ray has the silver bullet theory and all the rest of them are of course wrong. When are people going to stop revising history to fit their thoughts of what should have happened according to the biases.

"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

Nice try Ray

Just to clear up a mistake, in the above post.

Pentecostals didn't come out of the "Shakers and Holiness movement."

They started on the "Day of Pentecost" when *The Church* was born.

Can't get any closer than being in the beginning of God's NT Church.

Nuff said!

MEE

 

[Taufgesinnter]

Or to be more accurate, Pentecostalism was created in 1901 and came out of the Wesleyan Holiness movement.

 

[WPutnam]

Originally posted by Lorelei:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by WPutnam:
OK, if we were to follow your logic, you should then take the following verses literally as well: Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.

Yes, lets take it literally and realize that I am a literal dead man with no life in me at all. If this is speaking literally, then the breath I breath and the life I live makes the God out to be a liar. If, however, it speaks of spiritual life, then it must be speaking of the spiritual bread and blood and God's Word is proven true, not false.

~Lorelei </font>[/QUOTE]The scripture I quotes speaks nothing of a "dead man," but simply that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood, period.

There is no doubt that the Jews who abandoned Him, along with some of His own disciples in the "bread of life" discourse in John 6, did not understand this either, and in fact, were appalled by it!

Christ solved the problem at the Last Supper. It was not His natural body and blood but rather His {i]supernatural[/i] body and blood, under the apearance of bread and wine!

It is no longer bread and wine, even while it still looks, feels, tastes and digests like bread and wine but is no longer bread an wine.

Don't believe it? Join the rest of the Jews who abandoned Him, along with those disciples who returned to their former way of life...

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Pillar and Foundation of Truth, the Church. (1 Tim 3:15)

 

[WPutnam]

Originally posted by A_Christian:
The Church of Rome was Paganized by an influx of NON-CHRISTIANS who wanted to be a part of the NEW STATE RELIGION established by Constantine. Most of the people who infiltrated the church of Rome simply wanted to go where the power was. As soon as they got a foothold they began to paganize that church to suit their OWN tastes.

The gates of hell didn't prevail, and there were soon individuals that GOD called forth and directed to keep the candle of TRUE salvation alive, though rather dim for centuries, until the blaze of the Reformation re-established the WORD
of GOD and not traditions of man as GOD's standard
and CHRIST was re-established as the ROCK that His
CHURCH rested upon in the minds and hearts of men.

So just remember that as you gaze at YOUR statues of Mary and chant as you count your prayer beads. It is ALL pagan and not of GOD.

Who were these "individuals that GOD called forth and directed to keep the candle of TRUE salvation alive"?

Show me their writings, their artifacts, their catacombs or, in other words, this phantom "remnant church" that cannot be seen in history at all?

Let me tell you ahead of time: It is a pure figment of your imagination, sir, created to somehow justify a bolt from Holy Mother Church!

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Christus Vincit! Christus Regnat! Christus Imperat!

 

[WPutnam]

Originally posted by MEE:

Pentecostals didn't come out of the "Shakers and Holiness movement."

They started on the "Day of Pentecost" when *The Church* was born.

Can't get any closer than being in the beginning of God's NT Church.

Nuff said!

MEE

See my post to A_Christian that you can read and answer for me, MEE.

Document their existence from Pentecost, down through the 1500 years of history where the only church you can find is the ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC CHURCH.

There was no other church in existence that parallels the Catholic Church, MEE, not one!

(Save for the Orthodox Church, which broke away circa AD 1,000 but retain the same sacraments.)

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Et ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus et super hanc petram
aedificabo ecclesiam meam et portae inferi non praevalebunt
adversum eam et tibi dabo claves regni caelorum et quodcumque
ligaveris super terram erit ligatum in caelis et quodcumque
solveris super terram erit solutum in caelis.
(Matt 16:18-19 From the Latin Vulgate)

 

[WPutnam]

Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Or to be more accurate, Pentecostalism was created in 1901 and came out of the Wesleyan Holiness movement.

Taking your word for it, but also, the Wesleyan movenent was itself an offshoot from those others who inturned, offshoots that originally broke away from Catholicism.

They are branches cut from the tree, lying on the ground, no longer a part of Holy Church!

But God loves them anyway, and even the Catholic Church considers them "incomplete members" simply by their belief in Christ!

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Et ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus et super hanc petram
aedificabo ecclesiam meam et portae inferi non praevalebunt
adversum eam et tibi dabo claves regni caelorum et quodcumque
ligaveris super terram erit ligatum in caelis et quodcumque
solveris super terram erit solutum in caelis.
(Matt 16:18-19 From the Latin Vulgate)

 

[A_Christian]

WPutnam:

Any group of persons who have accepted Christ as their personal Savior is the CHURCH. Some individuals that I would allude to are as follows:

Peter Lombard, who wrote "The 4 Books of Sentences"

John Wyclif is another who followed Christ and not a "church" authority.

I don't care for catacombs, and yet while Christians at times worshipped there and may be buried there, this doesn't make it a possession of
the Roman Catholic church. No more than the building where Easton Bible Church is conducted belongs to the Roman Catholic church. You look at
buildings and statues and pageantry and artifacts and say, "Here is the Church." I know that Christ looks only upon the heart for His CHURCH.

Check out Anselm Vs Nicetus of 1136

 

[Ray Berrian]

Wputnam,

The topic is the Alexandrian School of Theology in Egypt that taught strictly by the allegorical method of interpretation. I will take time to respond to your idea of the 'Body and blood of Jesus.'

No one actually believes what Jesus said in the 100% literalness of His words. You said, 'The scripture I quoted speaks . . . . but simply that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood, period.

Ray is saying, 'I say this respectfully of the Eucharist. If it was really His flesh it would taste like human tissue. If it were actually blood it would have that kind of flavor and not a wine or grape juice flavor.

You said, 'Christ solved the problem at the Last Supper. It was not His natural body and blood but rather His {i]supernatural[/i] body and blood . . . '

Ray is saying, 'Christ's supernatural body is a spirit being that apparently has the form of a human man. You recall all the experiences of the apostles with the appearances of Christ after His resurrection. On the evening of the resurrection, He passed through the door without entering by turning the latchet or door handle. It seems impossible to eat His flesh which is not flesh at all, but spirit. It is difficult to drink His blood, because His blood is real and efficacious to cover our sins while we are here on this earth. There is no such entity as spirit, blood.'

You said, 'Under the apearance of bread and wine!'

Ray is saying, 'It sounds like you are saying, that His blood mimics bread and wine, but is in fact not actually/literally His Body and blood.' I know you don't believe this, but it sounds like what I have just described.

 

[CatholicConvert]

To my Catholic brothers --

Same old BS...different day.

Guys, why even bother trying to respond to this?

People with an agenda do not listen and are unteachable. Your time would be better spent Emailing the cowardly Bishop Lynch of Florida who is MUM while Terry Schiavo is being starved to death in his diocese.

And you have a nice day too.

Brother Ed

 

[mioque]

Ray
Reading your first post, It is hard to avoid the conclusion that you despise all forms of christianity that did not originate in the English speaking world. You are not automatically wrong for doing so, but it is worthwhile for the rest of us to notice that when we look at your tirades.

 

[Ray Berrian]

WPutnam,

I think the other poster had a point. There have been secret believers throughout all of human history. If they found copies of the Bible or copied a few verses from one, they cherished the new truth and light that the Spirit of God showed them. Remember those Bibles were chained to the priest's pulpit, perhaps so no one would steal them, but more importantly, because only an educated Latin student understood or presently understands the Word of God, the Bible.

Christians hid from the keen eyes of the archbishops who controlled each town and brought to justice anyone who deviated from Catholic quasi-christian doctrine as in Purgatory, Penance, Prayers for the dead, Mariolatry, prayers to the saints, and so on. These were the real born again believers called the Christian Church, rather than those who chanted the prayers from the Rosary and nodded to the creeds of the church.

 

[Ray Berrian]

mioque,

I hope that it is not just because you are lazy that you have nothing to say about the Alexandrian allegorical method of interpretation coming out of Egypt in the second century. Research this for yourself; it's great to be enlightened!

We accept Christians from all parts of the world, but we do not sweep under the theological rug, all their error, nor do we elevate it as being Divine truth. Get used to it.

Here is what you offered to us. 'Reading your first post, It is hard to avoid the conclusion that you despise all forms of christianity that did not originate in the English speaking world. You
are not automatically wrong for doing so, but it is worthwhile for the rest of us to notice that when we look at your tirades.'

Try not to be so open minded that you swallow everything you hear; it does not automatically make you bright or an intellectual.

 

[MEE]

Originally posted by Taufgesinnter:
Or to be more accurate, Pentecostalism was created in 1901 and came out of the Wesleyan Holiness movement.

Nope, don't believe so! "THE CHURCH" was 'born' and not 'created' on the Day of Pentecost. (Acts second chapter)

Apostolic Pentecostals still hold to the teachings of the Apostles, which could take in a lot of typing. I think most get the picture.

The Wesleyan Church never came into existence until years later.

MEE