prove why this is not true
>>18027569Why would Jesus found a pedophile ring?
>>18027569Yes, Jesus Christ founded the Church — but that Church is the whole apostolic community, preserved in multiple ancient traditions, including Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, and the Assyrian Church of the East. The Roman Catholic Church is one historical expression of it, but not the unique or sole continuation of Jesus’ foundation.
>source: Paul saw it in a dream
>>18027589Don't forget the apostolic Lutheran and Anglican churches.
>>18027569Technically Catholicism began with the Council of Nicaea as before that point there was never an ecumenical council and most Christians were still divided on the Arian controversy such that there was no singular overarching "church" yet to speak of.
>>18027599There's nothing valid about Lutheran or Anglican ordinations.
>>18027604The people in that image are not Lutherans or Anglicans or even Christians
Jesus excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople without papal aproval?
>>18027569>Matthew says Peter received the keys and the ability to bind and loose, and the other apostles received the ability to bind and loose 2 chapters later.>Everyone agrees Peter was the leader of the Apostles, but disagree on whether or not Peter's successors have full doctrinal and dogmatic authority on the whole body of the church.>Peter, having founded three churches in Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome has 3 successors but the papacy insists that because Peter died in Rome, only the Roman bishop is Peter's trve successor and the others were just random appointees(?)>Also Paul died in Rome too so that somehow proves the Petrine succession in Rome is extra special.>Popes have been excommunicated for being in error with the rest of the church. There have been Arian popes. Other popes have tried to wrangle other patriarchs in error.>"Peter has spoken through Leo!" Except Leo's Tome was being tested to its congruence with Cyril of Alexandria, whom everyone agreed was proclaiming the true faith>First Millennium Popes seem to have varying views on the role of the papacy, some do seem to claim the Vatican I dictatorial powers, while some speak openly against the idea of a universal bishop. Roman Catholics are ok with doctrinal development, so this point isn't really a gotcha, but it does seem like a circlejerk>The papacy used forgeries like the Donation of Constantine to claim secular dominance as well>Rome is geographically separated from the rest of the pentarchy and it seems like a logical conclusion that such isolation would result in general accretions over time, including papal supremacy vs first-among-equals. The Western Empire's collapse also gives geopolitical reasons for the HRE to push the Roman patriarch into odds with the rest of the pentarchy.It seems like a lot of mental gymnastics to defend the development of papal supremacy. It doesn't seem like a very defensible view.
>>18027634>disagree on whether or not Peter's successorsWe disagree on who Peter's successors are. People say Peter was the first Bishop of Antioch and also the first Bishop of Rome, so they should both have the right to claim the title of successors of St. Peter.But then again, since Martin Luther, John Calvin and Huldrych Zwingli were all ordained priests in their time, they too have a right to apostolic succession. Ditto for the Archbishop of Canterbury and others that had that title since before the days of the Protestant Reformation.If Marsilio Ficino could be a Neo-Platonist without having a direct line of succession from the ancient Academy founded by Plato in Athens and the Byzantine Empire under the Palaeologian dynasty could claim to be the rightful successor to the Eastern Roman Empire up till 1204, then by all means it is possible to claim that all Protestant Christians and Orthodox Christians alike have just as much of a valid claim to being members of the Church founded by Jesus Christ.
>>18027569Nobody disagrees. It's the medieval doctrinal developments people have a problem with
>>18027585That was established before Jesus was born, through Judaism.
>>18028660So Jews founded the Catholic Church?
>>18028687Probably, who knows. They love sticking their fingers everywhere.
>>18027569>>18027695Those flames just got hotter. Enjoy.
>>18027585It explains why he wasn't married.
I'm pretty sure he was an apocalyptic eschatologist, and had no interest in forming a religion.
>>18028715I'm pretty sure your brain is completely worthless.
>>18027569Catholic means universal. Which means all beliefs under one umbrella. With the Catholic church you don't have to stop worshipping your pagan gods, you just have to call them by the name of a saint or virgin. It's a polytheist religion, it acknowledges the one true God above all but also many subservant gods under him which you can honor and pray to and set altars to. Which is polytheism. The Sovereign LORD must be worshipped alone. He demands exclusive worship, he is a jealous God for what is rightfully his. He does not share his glory with anyone.
>>18027569>prove why this is not trueEasy. Jesus didn't exist.
>>18028767You are very stupid.
>>18027604In that case, the Roman Catholic Church is absolutely invalidated for its long history of burning other Christians alive. Not exactly loving one's neighbor and enemy with that one.
>>18029068>P1.) Spreading heresy damns people to hellP2.) Damning people to hell warrants the death penaltyC.) Therefore we should burn hereticsPeople will disagree with this and then say we should administer the death penalty to serial killers for the good of society. Also "burning at the stake" was just putting people above burning thatch where they'd just fall asleep from smoke inhalation where the corpse is then consumed by the flames which is ideal for managing disease>"But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’"
>>18027604reminder this poster is a subhuman brazilian
