Discussion: Is the Holy Roman Catholic Church the only true Christian church?

"The first reference to Linus appears in the chronicles of Irenaeus, the infamous heresy hunter, whose mission in life was to consolidate the authority of the Roman church and squash what he viewed as inappropriate deviations from the teachings of Christ (such as Gnosticism).

In other words, Irenaeus is not exactly an objective historian. His record of Linus was supposedly based on a list of the bishops of Rome. Irenaeus wrote:

After the Holy Apostles (Peter and Paul) had founded and set the Church in order (in Rome) they gave over the exercise of the episcopal office to Linus. The same Linus is mentioned by St. Paul in his Epistle to Timothy. His successor was Anacletus. ​

You might want to read that paragraph a few times, because it's the entire basis of the authority of the Roman Catholic church. Without this paragraph, there is no legitimate historical record to support the key Catholic doctrine of the "apostolic succession," which states that Catholicism is the only true religion because it was directly handed down from the Apostle Peter, whom Jesus Christ supposedly selected to lead the church. "

"The point here is that the most important part of the apostolic succession -- the part that actually connects to Peter -- is unverifiable. The entire foundation of the apostolic succession is one paragraph written by a Roman Catholic propagandist more than 100 years after the fact."

 

I agree. I've stated my beliefs. I'm tired of defending them and being told how wrong I am for having them.

 

its turned into a copy and paste fest with no substance at all. No one speaking their own thoughts when confronted either due to ignorance or failure to accept the truth. at least u and katt tried having some discourse/debate.

js is simply way too uninformed and jaded to be chiming in on catholicism.

I only know stuff like the NFL draft so I'll stay out.

 

Besides Martin noone here has mentioned the words "You are Wrong for having your beliefs" There have been arguments on both sides but no one has belittled anyone for their beliefs. No maybe there was some for the way and the points you used to express your beliefs. And even the bashing of the catholic church has taken place in some form or another.

BUT do not go saying that people are treating or making fun or belittling you for your beliefs because that is how very very bad things get started.

 

thats what happens when you believe in ghosts and spirits.

 

and everyone will continue to ignore martin since he's as significant as TE on a Brady rant.

 

In his on way martin does make good points. But what happens is what has happened throughout history, he says one thing that no one likes and they tune him out. If you were able to sit and listen to him with an open mind you might find some of what he says to be very insightful and not just Brady bashing jibberish.

He may not be the best at TACTFULLY getting his point across, but his point is intresting if you give it a chance. Doesnt mean you have to agree with him, because I sure as hell don't, but how well can you know yourself and your feelings for something if you dont have the counterpart to judge them on.

 

That is what a debate is about, stating your beliefs and defending them. You made statements and claimed that you believed they were official Church teaching. I refuted that, showing where the Church taught the opposite.

Any of us have to use the Bible or Catholic tracts to make points.

 

Not true. The list of Roman Bishops compiled some time in the second century was used as a reference when Ireaneous wrote "Against Heresy" This list was used by several of the early Chruch fathers in compiling lists of the Popes there is near universal agreement that Linus was the second pope, but some have suggested that Cletus was second and Linus third. The point is we know with certainty that Linus was a Pope and that he was a successor to St. Peter.

 

You know, Martin, for somebody who is as intelligent as you claim to be, you really amount to little more than comic relief. What a waste.