***CONSTANTINE and the CHURCH HISTORY!!!

[Kenshiro]

---

It would be better to attack the belief system and not personal attacks to denomination.
In other words attack the Idea not the person or its religion. So far there is this one poster here who has nothing but baseless claims. Even to the point of mentioning that Protestants are just using the term "tsismis"? Although you would win in the argument of personal attacks to religion but not on a substantive arguments.

Take into consideration that the Protestants purpose from separating from the catholic is not separation itself, or money making, it is due to the collective study of the scriptures and clear evidences that catholic has contradiction to the scriptures. You say that the catholic made the Bible but they themselves contradict this.
To make this clear there is no confusion on the Bible text you can even compare the changes that they made in the Bible to the original manuscript.
Also catholics they are honest enough to admit these changes in the Bible as you might think but this is not the case.
It is through their own power or authority to change the bible. I cant think of any other purpose on changing the scriptures even if its too obvious to a common christian but it is to purposely defile God's
scriptures and to blaspheme the Lord.

The statement vicar of god on earth has 2 meanings:
1. they preached Gods scriptures with Gods authority which is totally fine.
2. They claim to be god on earth with higher authority to Christ and can forgive sins. which is blasphemous

The evidence shows the second meaning.
Evidences that supports the second meaning they change the scriptures with the authority higher than Christ.
2nd evidence they claim to forgive sins(priestly confessions)

Definition of blasphemy in the Bible
John 10:33
Mathew 9:2-3
Only through Christ can we attain forgiveness and not any medium like priest which is actually from a paganistic practice of medium communicating with the spirits.

As for the apocrypha and gnostic Books
There are very good logical, inconsistency and scriptural evidences why they were not included.

[tokidoki_v2.0]

Enough talk. Time for action!

[dcuenco]

Kanang uban sigi ug usig, wala man gud na sila maka paminaw tanan sa church history topics ani nga thread. Kung naminaw pa na sila, maka kita unta na sa total picture. Mao nang dili ko mu sulti ug unsa ko nga pundok. Personalon man gud. Pasagdan ta lang na sila.

Conflict towards the roman catholic church has existed for centuries already. Ever since rome has insisted on imposing their paganistic rituals and mixing it with christianity, there has always been contentions. These were emphasized in the early 15th and 16th century when the abuses of rome became more and more obvious. Na bisto sila ug samot kadtong nang gawas na ang daghang bibliya nga ilaha untang gi ban. At a certain time, puro ra latin nga translations ilang gipa gawas para ang mga pari ra ug tawo ra nila ang maka sabot. Kadtong nag kupot ug lain nga translations, gipang patay.

Liman ka, magpa bayad ug kwarta para kuno mo gamay ang time sa purgatory. Magpa bayad ug kwarta para maka fund sa crusades with a promise nga kung mo hatag ka ug kwarta ma hatagan ka ug temporal forgiveness of sins. Kining mga crusades ug inquisitions daghang gipang patay, dili lang jews, ug muslims kung dili hasta pud mga kristyano nga wala mo tahod sa roma.

I would like to believe that these are not happening in these present times. I continue to search for answers....

[ketllac]

@kenshiro

It would be better to attack the belief system and not personal attacks to denomination.

-Kenshiro you've made good advice to your fellow protestants here in this forum namely santopaps, wordofgod, et al. Good job dude. If I may ask do you know the term double standard? I believe you do. Just open your eyes and you will see that protestants are very hostile to Catholics. Now in the case of Dcuenco, how can we attack his belief system when hes not even disclosing the name of his church. its funny to know that hes using recycled argument from seventh day Adventist but he claims that he doesn't belong to that church. If you assess it, is simply an intellectual/academic dishonesty. He even entitled the thread using the word "history" but he just using the argument from a different sect just to suit his agenda. How can he claim that it is part of recorded history when the author of that argument is anti catholic and biased. He doesn't have rights to use the word "history" in the first place. He can't even give an independent historians that supports his argument which is merely borrowed from different belief system.

In other words attack the Idea not the person or its religion.

This is a contradiction from your post above. attacking a belief system is also attacking a religion because as a definition religion is a set of belief. You even said above "It would be better to attack the belief system" in which You contradicted your self.

So far there is this one poster here who has nothing but baseless claims. Even to the point of mentioning that Protestants are just using the term "tsismis"?

-I know your talking about me. If he can't provide at least 3 independent reputable historians that accusation is equivalent to "TSISMIS".

Although you would win in the argument of personal attacks to religion but not on a substantive arguments.

-Who would provide a substantive arguments, the accuser or the defender?
FYI the burden of proof must be on the accuser's side.

Take into consideration that the Protestants purpose from separating from the catholic is not separation itself, or money making,

-Contradiction again. it is a tautology. the words that merely repeat elements of the meaning already conveyed.
It is also a money making because most protestant churches required their members to contribute 10 % of their income.

it is due to the collective study of the scriptures and clear evidences that catholic has contradiction to the scriptures. You say that the catholic made the Bible but they themselves contradict this.To make this clear there is no confusion on the Bible text you can even compare the changes that they made in the Bible to the original manuscript.Also catholics they are honest enough to admit these changes in the Bible as you might think but this is not the case.

Catholic doctrines don't have any contradictions. all teachings are biblical and apostolic. It sounded unblibical when Luther removed the seven books.
The word contradiction is applicable to your protestant churches. Now if your church has no contradictions to the scriptures why protestant/evangelical churches have different interpretations from the so called collective study?

It is through their own power or authority to change the bible. I cant think of any other purpose on changing the scriptures even if its too obvious to a common christian but it is to purposely defile God's
scriptures and to blaspheme the Lord.

-Did you know that Luther successfully removed the seven books but he failed to remove James. Kinsa may blasphemous?

2. They claim to be god on earth with higher authority to Christ and can forgive sins. which is blasphemous

-that is logical fallacy called straw Man. Give us an official teaching and document from Catechism of the Catholic Church that the pope has higher authority than Christ. If you can't give us an official teaching, then I have the right to say that it is TSISMIS.

The evidence shows the second meaning.
Evidences that supports the second meaning they change the scriptures with the authority higher than Christ.
2nd evidence they claim to forgive sins(priestly confessions)

Definition of blasphemy in the Bible
John 10:33
Mathew 9:2-3
Only through Christ can we attain forgiveness and not any medium like priest which is actually from a paganistic practice of medium communicating with the spirits.

How can you logically infer from that verse that penance is exercising higher authority than Christ?

-During his lifetime Christ sent out his followers to do his work. Just before he left this world, he gave the apostles special authority, commissioning them to make God’s forgiveness present to all people, and the whole Christian world accepted this, until just a few centuries ago. If there is an "invention" here, it is not the sacrament of penance, but the notion that the sacramental forgiveness of sins is not to be found in the Bible or in early Christian history.

As for the apocrypha and gnostic Books
There are very good logical, inconsistency and scriptural evidences why they were not included.

Who gave Luther the authority to remove those books?

[dcuenco]

topic of the thread is church history. Here is lecture 14, Part 1, The reformation beyond germany. This is after martin luther died and others continued to go against the catholic church. As narrated in the lectures, many others came before and after martin luther who went against the institutions of the Roman Catholic Church. Martin Luther was a monk of the augustinian order. He did not want become completely radical against the RCC for fear that it might become counter productive. Listen to this:

Church History Series, The Reformation beyond Germany, Part 1 - YouTube

[ketllac]

@dcuenco

yes the topic of this thread is church history. so please provide independent sources such as historians and independent authors to make your claim historically valid.

the author of the youtube link that you've posted is David Guzik Calvary Chapel Bible College pastor in Germany. Obviously he is not a catholic and he is member of a certain denomination. How can we know that he doesnt have any biases towards Catholicism.

ako kang pasabton ha. kung moadto kag korte dili ka pwede mo witness sa imong igsoon nga walay sala kay bias ka. wala kay taas nga credibility kay igsoon ka. Kuha.

tan-awa ang argumento ni yanong gi kuhaan ug sources sa tulo ka bahin. una from catholic side, ika duha sa independent souces, ika tulo sa protestant nga side. maka tarog ba ka ha ka sa iya reason ug facts...

Establish sa ang facts/historicity para dili equivalent imo accusation as bias or tsismis. kuha?

bisan kapila ka pa mo labay ug sources basta biased na less appealing na. ug mahimo ra nang nanghilabot ka sa among simbahan. kuha mo?

[dcuenco]

Nya, naka dungog mo? As what it says, these are the basic thoeological points of the reformation movement:

They believed that the basis of christian doctrine comes from....

1) Salvation comes from Christ alone - "I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no one goes to the Father EXCEPT through Me".
Catholics believe salvation comes from Christ AND the "intercession" of Mary and the saints.
2) Grace is received by Faith alone -
Catholics believe in grace by faith AND works, traditions, AND the sacraments.

3) God's revelations come from the scriptures alone -
Catholics claims the doctrines are based on the bible AND the declarations of the pope and the rcc.

4) Salvation is granted by Grace alone. - Catholics believe salvation is granted by grace AND the works of man.

Moreover, they pushed the doctrine that man does not need the priests, the saints, or mary to come to God. They believed that through Christ, man is justified to come to the presence of God. "direct access"

From these differences come the many arguments between christians and the rcc.

[ketllac]

@dcuenco

giingnan na taka ana sa ako previous post. ang history tali sa Protestantism ug catholisms ma sum up sa pag protest ni luther ug pag create nya ani nga doctrine known as 5 solas;

1.Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
2. Sola fide ("by faith alone")
3. Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
4. Solus Christus or Solo Christo ("Christ alone" or "through Christ alone")
5. Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")


sige i research kuno? naa ba sa bible nga the word only
sa sola scriptura. so sa history ang nag invent ana nga doctrine ang protestant. kay wala pa nang 5 solas established na daan ang apostolic teaching until the time nga gi invent ni Luther ng doktrina. unya kinsay nag invent diha sa history?

now kung bible alone (sola scriptura) lang man kaha ang basis sa faith and morals sa mga protestant. Nganong mo rely man ka sa history books aside from the bible nga makit-an man kaha diha sa bible ang answer tanan?

[rclong_rey]

catholic church founded by Christ Himself around 33AD when he said to Peter "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter [which means a rock], and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" ( Matthew xvi, 18 ).

and only Catholic Church has the authority to preach the Gospel from Jesus Christ Himself.
before constantine naa nay mga katoliko, St. Ignatius of Antioch was the first Bishop use the term katholicos means universal, tungod kay naa nay daghang nagpatuo nga chistians then nag preach ug gospel nga sayup..it was by necessity para ma distinguish ang tinuod nga Christians sa mga pakaarun ingnun. and the first Christians also were the same souls the catholic kay giusab ra man ang ngalan but ang mga nagdumala ug mga faithful mao ra man..

for more reliable source please be patient in reading through the link below if you like to know more..for you fellow Catholics and non-catholics.

anything regarding catholicism -> Fish Eaters: The Whys and Hows of Traditional Catholicism
History and catechism of Bible-> Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible Verses Online, Study, Search Scriptures.
Brief History and facts of Catholicism->
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/...ism/origin.htm
and if you want to read the detailed History of of Catholic Church you may purchase this book "Church History" by Fr. John Laux, M.A., Tan books ang nagprint ani. ambot lang kaha ug naa ba kaha ang Sinagtala publication ani. nahisgutan nganhi tanan inyo gi awayan..

[ketllac]

Thanks rclong_rey.. pero expect nga tagaan ka nila anti catholic nga link....

tataw ayo nga naay motibo behind ani. ang pangutana naa bay katoliko nga grabe mo saway aning mga protestant nga puro ra man na depensa.?
wala sad ko nakakitag link dre nga katoliko mobatikos sa laing relihiyon. kung ang purpose ninyo maayo base sa inyong pag too ug ang pag edukar. didto na ihatag sa inyong kaubang tomotoo. This is not appropriate avenue to proselyte ang do marketing..

matod pang yanong...magsakit inyong ulo kung di mo kabatikos sa katoliko? hehehhee