Remedial Bible Study Verses For Mutt, Lee, and Fred

[Deleted]

I.   Does the Bible reference or describe the early Church?  (For those modern Protestants who insist that the praxis and theology of the Church is "sola scriptura.")



Matthew 16:18King James Version (KJV)

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.



Matthew 18:17King James Version (KJV)

17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.



Acts 2:47King James Version (KJV)

47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.


Acts 8:1King James Version (KJV)

8 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.



Acts 9:31King James Version (KJV)

31 Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.


Acts 11:22King James Version (KJV)

22 Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.



Acts 11:26King James Version (KJV)

26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.



Acts 13:1King James Version (KJV)

13 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.



Acts 14:23King James Version (KJV)

23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.



Acts 15:3King James Version (KJV)

3 And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren.




Acts 15:22King James Version (KJV)

22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas and Silas, chief men among the brethren:



Acts 15:41King James Version (KJV)

41 And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches.



Acts 18:22King James Version (KJV)

22 And when he had landed at Caesarea, and gone up, and saluted the church, he went down to Antioch.


Acts 20:17King James Version (KJV)

17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.



Acts 20:28King James Version (KJV)

28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.



Romans 16:1King James Version (KJV)

16 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:



Romans 16:5King James Version (KJV)

5 Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.



Romans 16:23King James Version (KJV)

23 Gaius mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you. Erastus the chamberlain of the city saluteth you, and Quartus a brother.



1 Corinthians 1:2King James Version (KJV)

2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:



1 Corinthians 4:17King James Version (KJV)

17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.



1 Corinthians 16:1King James Version (KJV)

16 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye.



1 Corinthians 16:19King James Version (KJV)

19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.



2 Corinthians 1:1King James Version (KJV)

1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia:



2 Corinthians 8:1King James Version (KJV)

8 Moreover, brethren, we do you to wit of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia;


2 Corinthians 8:23King James Version (KJV)

23 Whether any do enquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellow helper concerning you: or our brethren be enquired of, they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ.


Galatians 1:2King James Version (KJV)

2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:



Philippians 4:15King James Version (KJV)

15 Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only.


Colossians 4:15King James Version (KJV)

15 Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in his house.



Colossians 4:16King James Version (KJV)

16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.



1 Thessalonians 1:1King James Version (KJV)

1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.



2 Thessalonians 1:1King James Version (KJV)

1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:



1 Timothy 3:15King James Version (KJV)

15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.



James 5:14King James Version (KJV)

14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:



1 Peter 5:13King James Version (KJV)

13 The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.



3 John 9King James Version (KJV)

9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.


Revelation 1:4King James Version (KJV)

4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;



Revelation 1:11King James Version (KJV)

11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.



Revelation 2:1King James Version (KJV)

2 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;



Revelation 2:1King James Version (KJV)

2 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;


Revelation 2:12King James Version (KJV)

12 And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges;



Revelation 2:18King James Version (KJV)

18 And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;

[Deleted]

II.  Does the Bible mention the ordination of bishops by the Apostles of the early Church?   (Greek:  "episcopos")




1 Timothy 3:2King James Version (KJV)

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;



Philippians 1:1King James Version (KJV)

1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:



1 Timothy 3:1King James Version (KJV)

3 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.




Titus 1:7King James Version (KJV)

7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre;



1 Peter 2:25King James Version (KJV)

25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.  (i.e., Christ as the Archetypal "Bishop")

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

III.   Who were the Apostolic Fathers-- the first Bishops of the Church ordained by the Apostles?

[oujour76]

Apr 22, 2017 19:59:57 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

I.   Does the Bible reference or describe the early Church?  (For those modern Protestants who insist that the praxis and theology of the Church is "sola scriptura.")



There were many early Churches.  The Arians, for example.  To say your church is or was "the" Church is off base by a long shot. 

[Deleted]

Apr 23, 2017 9:13:10 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 22, 2017 19:59:57 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

I.   Does the Bible reference or describe the early Church?  (For those modern Protestants who insist that the praxis and theology of the Church is "sola scriptura.")



There were many early Churches.  The Arians, for example.  To say your church is or was "the" Church is off base by a long shot. 

Wrong, Harry.  Are you saying that Arius was not part of the Church when the Emperor Constantine convened the First Great Ecumenical Council at Nicea?

On the contrary, Arius was one of the bishops who attended the Council at Nicea in 325 A.D.

His flawed "Arian" concept of Christology was declared a false teaching (heresy) by the Council.

(Among other things, it was directly contradicted by the Holy Scriptures.)

In the Church, Divine theoria and praxis was thought to reside in the consensus of the councils of the Apostles and their successor bishops-- not in the opinions of any "infallible" bishop or individual.  (The dogma of Papal Infallibility was not promulgated in the schismatic Roman Catholic Church until 1871!)

The scriptural precedent for Apostolic councils was the first council at Jerusalem (presided over by James the Righteous-- the elder step brother of Christ) that decided the Church would allow the Gentiles to become part of the Church.  This became the model for governance of the Church, and the formulation of the Church canons.

In the 11th century, the schismatic bishops of Rome reorganized the Latin Church along the lines of a monarchical Papacy.

But this was never the structure of the Church during the first 1,000 years of Church history.

And why do so few people in the West know the true history of the Church?

Because the Roman Papacy spent the past 1,000 years propagating a false, revised history-- claiming that the Church originated in Rome, (rather than Jerusalem) and had always been governed by a monarchical Roman bishop.

[oujour76]

Apr 23, 2017 11:54:48 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 23, 2017 9:13:10 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Wrong, Harry.  Are you saying that Arius was not part of the Church when the Emperor Constantine convened the First Great Ecumenical Council at Nicea?

On the contrary, Arius was one of the bishops who attended the Council at Nicea in 325 A.D.

His flawed "Arian" concept of Christology was declared a false teaching (heresy) by the Council.

(Among other things, it was directly contradicted by the Holy Scriptures.)

In the Church, Divine theoria and praxis was thought to reside in the consensus of the councils of the Apostles and their successor bishops-- not in the opinions of any "infallible" bishop or individual.  (The dogma of Papal Infallibility was not promulgated in the schismatic Roman Catholic Church until 1871!)

The scriptural precedent for Apostolic councils was the first council at Jerusalem (presided over by James the Righteous-- the elder step brother of Christ) that decided the Church would allow the Gentiles to become part of the Church.  This became the model for governance of the Church, and the formulation of the Church canons.

In the 11th century, the schismatic bishops of Rome reorganized the Latin Church along the lines of a monarchical Papacy.

But this was never the structure of the Church during the first 1,000 years of Church history.

And why do so few people in the West know the true history of the Church?

Because the Roman Papacy spent the past 1,000 years propagating a false, revised history-- claiming that the Church originated in Rome, (rather than Jerusalem) and had always been governed by a monarchical Roman bishop.

Got it. The Arians had different beliefs...therefore they're heretics. Have been telling you for a long time that there is a difference between God and religion. Maybe someday you will figure out what that means, instead of responding with the usual cut and paste job.

[Deleted]

Apr 23, 2017 14:06:20 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 23, 2017 11:54:48 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Wrong, Harry.  Are you saying that Arius was not part of the Church when the Emperor Constantine convened the First Great Ecumenical Council at Nicea?

On the contrary, Arius was one of the bishops who attended the Council at Nicea in 325 A.D.

His flawed "Arian" concept of Christology was declared a false teaching (heresy) by the Council.

(Among other things, it was directly contradicted by the Holy Scriptures.)

In the Church, Divine theoria and praxis was thought to reside in the consensus of the councils of the Apostles and their successor bishops-- not in the opinions of any "infallible" bishop or individual.  (The dogma of Papal Infallibility was not promulgated in the schismatic Roman Catholic Church until 1871!)

The scriptural precedent for Apostolic councils was the first council at Jerusalem (presided over by James the Righteous-- the elder step brother of Christ) that decided the Church would allow the Gentiles to become part of the Church.  This became the model for governance of the Church, and the formulation of the Church canons.

In the 11th century, the schismatic bishops of Rome reorganized the Latin Church along the lines of a monarchical Papacy.

But this was never the structure of the Church during the first 1,000 years of Church history.

And why do so few people in the West know the true history of the Church?

Because the Roman Papacy spent the past 1,000 years propagating a false, revised history-- claiming that the Church originated in Rome, (rather than Jerusalem) and had always been governed by a monarchical Roman bishop.

Got it. The Arians had different beliefs...therefore they're heretics. Have been telling you for a long time that there is a difference between God and religion. Maybe someday you will figure out what that means, instead of responding with the usual cut and paste job.

Way to change the subject, dude.

Was Arius part of the Church-- before he was anathematized for teaching a false, non-Apostolic doctrine?

Yes.  In fact, (like Leo Tolstoy) he was, allegedly, planning to repent and be re-admitted into the communion of the saints when he died in Constantinople.

If you want to understand the Church in relation to false teachings that were never part of the Apostolic Church community (ekklesia) you need to study St. Irenaeus's Against Heresies-- written in the mid second century A.D.

Of course, if you do not believe in the testimony and teachings of the Apostles (from the New Testament, epistles of the Apostolic Fathers, and in the Apostolic traditions of the Church) the concept of heresy will mean nothing to you.

BUT, in the Apostolic Church (Orthodox+ pre-schismatic RC) the preservation of the correct teachings and traditions of the Apostles was critically important-- a Divine revelation which was NOT to be altered or adulterated by false teachers..

[oujour76]

Apr 23, 2017 21:32:45 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Way to change the subject, dude.

Was Arius part of the Church-- before he was anathematized for teaching a false, non-Apostolic doctrine?

Yes.  In fact, (like Leo Tolstoy) he was, allegedly, planning to repent and be re-admitted into the communion of the saints when he died in Constantinople.

If you want to understand the Church in relation to false teachings that were never part of the Apostolic Church community (ekklesia) you need to study St. Irenaeus's Against Heresies-- written in the mid second century A.D.

Of course, if you do not believe in the testimony and teachings of the Apostles (from the New Testament, epistles of the Apostolic Fathers, and in the Apostolic traditions of the Church) the concept of heresy will mean nothing to you.

BUT, in the Apostolic Church (Orthodox+ pre-schismatic RC) the preservation of the correct teachings and traditions of the Apostles was critically important-- a Divine revelation which was NOT to be altered or adulterated by false teachers..

[/font][/quote]

Dude? LOL. All of that stuff you are talking about is man made. The Arians didn't win the vote at Nicea...if they had, you would be the heretic.

[Deleted]

Apr 23, 2017 22:44:07 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 23, 2017 21:32:45 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Way to change the subject, dude.

Was Arius part of the Church-- before he was anathematized for teaching a false, non-Apostolic doctrine?

Yes.  In fact, (like Leo Tolstoy) he was, allegedly, planning to repent and be re-admitted into the communion of the saints when he died in Constantinople.

If you want to understand the Church in relation to false teachings that were never part of the Apostolic Church community (ekklesia) you need to study St. Irenaeus's Against Heresies-- written in the mid second century A.D.

Of course, if you do not believe in the testimony and teachings of the Apostles (from the New Testament, epistles of the Apostolic Fathers, and in the Apostolic traditions of the Church) the concept of heresy will mean nothing to you.

BUT, in the Apostolic Church (Orthodox+ pre-schismatic RC) the preservation of the correct teachings and traditions of the Apostles was critically important-- a Divine revelation which was NOT to be altered or adulterated by false teachers..

[/font][/quote]

Dude? LOL. All of that stuff you are talking about is man made. The Arians didn't win the vote at Nicea...if they had, you would be the heretic.
[/quote]


Two words, Harry.  Holy Spirit.

Recall the holy scripture.  Christ told the Apostles that He would send them the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, who would "guide them in the way of all truth."

So, you do greatly err when you say that the mysteries and doctrines of the Church were merely man made-- and a result of human deliberation sans Holy Wisdom.

It was rather a process of Theosis-- of the Apostolic and Counciliar judgment of the saints-- those who were co-conscious with the Divine Mind.

As one of the saints once said, the mystical theology of the Church is a "fabric woven on high"-- the precise opposite of man-made.

[oujour76]

Apr 24, 2017 0:31:06 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 23, 2017 22:44:07 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

[/font][/quote]

Dude? LOL. All of that stuff you are talking about is man made. The Arians didn't win the vote at Nicea...if they had, you would be the heretic.
[/quote]


Two words, Harry.  Holy Spirit.

Recall the holy scripture.  Christ told the Apostles that He would send them the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, who would "guide them in the way of all truth."

So, you do greatly err when you say that the mysteries and doctrines of the Church were merely man made-- and a result of human deliberation sans Holy Wisdom.

It was rather a process of Theosis-- of the Apostolic and Counciliar judgment of the saints-- those who were co-conscious with the Divine Mind.

As one of the saints once said, the mystical theology of the Church is a "fabric woven on high"-- the precise opposite of man-made.[/quote]

Am familiar with those two words. But, not at all familiar with when the Holy Spirit directed the usage elaborate costumes, gold, jewels, elaborate structures, incense, rituals, a strict hierarchy and all the rest. It's all very convenient...only a select few are chosen who can talk to God without a filter, and not so coincidentally, those chosen are the same ones doing the choosing. God vs. Religion.

[Deleted]

Apr 24, 2017 9:59:00 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 24, 2017 0:31:06 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

[/font][/quote]

Dude? LOL. All of that stuff you are talking about is man made. The Arians didn't win the vote at Nicea...if they had, you would be the heretic.
[/quote]


Two words, Harry.  Holy Spirit.

Recall the holy scripture.  Christ told the Apostles that He would send them the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, who would "guide them in the way of all truth."

So, you do greatly err when you say that the mysteries and doctrines of the Church were merely man made-- and a result of human deliberation sans Holy Wisdom.

It was rather a process of Theosis-- of the Apostolic and Counciliar judgment of the saints-- those who were co-conscious with the Divine Mind.

As one of the saints once said, the mystical theology of the Church is a "fabric woven on high"-- the precise opposite of man-made.[/quote]

Am familiar with those two words. But, not at all familiar with when the Holy Spirit directed the usage elaborate costumes, gold, jewels, elaborate structures, incense, rituals, a strict hierarchy and all the rest. It's all very convenient...only a select few are chosen who can talk to God without a filter, and not so coincidentally, those chosen are the same ones doing the choosing. God vs. Religion.
[/quote]


Harry,

      It's called Apostolic Succession.  Most of the praxis of the Church was derived from the Judaic Temple and synagogues of the first century A.D.-- the structure of the liturgy, psalmody, basilicas, vestiture, and even the form of the eucharistic canon-- which was derived from the Temple rites relating to the tabernacle and the Holy of Holies.

      Not surprising, in that the Church was established by observant Jews in the first century Roman Empire.

      The criteria of authenticity vs. pseudo- (heretical) praxis in the early Church was, 1) Apostolic Succession of the episcopate and priesthood, 2) canonicty-- i.e., praxis and theoria that was consistent with Apostolic (and scriptural) tradition.

      The interesting thing about Martin Luther (and Protestant) SOLA SCRIPURA theology is that it is NOT scriptural-- not in full accord with the Holy Scriptures.

      I had figured that much out by the time I was a (Protestant) teenager-- and could give you numerous examples.

      If you are truly interested in understanding these issues in early Church history, you need to read St. Eusebius Pamphilius's Ecclesiastical History (328 A.D.) and St. Irenaeus of Lyon's Against Heresies (177 A.D.)   Eusebius documents the Apostolic Succession of the early Church, and Ireneaus uses the Holy Scripture to refute the prominent heresies of the first Christian century-- Arianism, Gnosticism, Docetism, Marcionism, etc.

     

[Walter]

Apr 24, 2017 11:30:28 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

Apr 24, 2017 9:59:00 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

[/font][/quote]

Dude? LOL. All of that stuff you are talking about is man made. The Arians didn't win the vote at Nicea...if they had, you would be the heretic.
[/quote]


Two words, Harry.  Holy Spirit.

Recall the holy scripture.  Christ told the Apostles that He would send them the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, who would "guide them in the way of all truth."

So, you do greatly err when you say that the mysteries and doctrines of the Church were merely man made-- and a result of human deliberation sans Holy Wisdom.

It was rather a process of Theosis-- of the Apostolic and Counciliar judgment of the saints-- those who were co-conscious with the Divine Mind.

As one of the saints once said, the mystical theology of the Church is a "fabric woven on high"-- the precise opposite of man-made.[/quote]

Am familiar with those two words. But, not at all familiar with when the Holy Spirit directed the usage elaborate costumes, gold, jewels, elaborate structures, incense, rituals, a strict hierarchy and all the rest. It's all very convenient...only a select few are chosen who can talk to God without a filter, and not so coincidentally, those chosen are the same ones doing the choosing. God vs. Religion.
[/quote]


Harry,

      It's called Apostolic Succession.  Most of the praxis of the Church was derived from the Judaic Temple and synagogues of the first century A.D.-- the structure of the liturgy, psalmody, basilicas, vestiture, and even the form of the eucharistic canon-- which was derived from the Temple rites relating to the tabernacle and the Holy of Holies.

      Not surprising, in that the Church was established by observant Jews in the first century Roman Empire.

      The criteria of authenticity vs. pseudo- (heretical) praxis in the early Church was, 1) Apostolic Succession of the episcopate and priesthood, 2) canonicty-- i.e., praxis and theoria that was consistent with Apostolic (and scriptural) tradition.

      The interesting thing about Martin Luther (and Protestant) SOLA SCRIPURA theology is that it is NOT scriptural-- not in full accord with the Holy Scriptures.

      I had figured that much out by the time I was a (Protestant) teenager-- and could give you numerous examples.

      If you are truly interested in understanding these issues in early Church history, you need to read St. Eusebius Pamphilius's Ecclesiastical History (328 A.D.) and St. Irenaeus of Lyon's Against Heresies (177 A.D.)   Eusebius documents the Apostolic Succession of the early Church, and Ireneaus uses the Holy Scripture to refute the prominent heresies of the first Christian century-- Arianism, Gnosticism, Docetism, Marcionism, etc.

     
[/quote]

All I know is that when I was about 7 or 8 years old and finally old enough to sit in the main church instead of the kid's parish on Sundays, my mother asked something like, how did I feel now that I was sitting in God's house? I looked around and asked if she could point me to who was God and where he might be sitting. I don't recall what she said, but it was something like, "...It's not a person. God is everywhere; he's all around us..." I looked to the rafters and in all the areas of the church and still saw nothing. Honest to God, (pun intended), at that moment, my first day in church with adults, I knew something was seriously wrong with the concept, and I've never recovered any faith after that moment.

[Deleted]

Apr 24, 2017 12:10:23 GMT -5 Walter said:

Apr 24, 2017 11:30:28 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

[/font][/quote]

Dude? LOL. All of that stuff you are talking about is man made. The Arians didn't win the vote at Nicea...if they had, you would be the heretic.
[/quote]


Two words, Harry.  Holy Spirit.

Recall the holy scripture.  Christ told the Apostles that He would send them the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, who would "guide them in the way of all truth."

So, you do greatly err when you say that the mysteries and doctrines of the Church were merely man made-- and a result of human deliberation sans Holy Wisdom.

It was rather a process of Theosis-- of the Apostolic and Counciliar judgment of the saints-- those who were co-conscious with the Divine Mind.

As one of the saints once said, the mystical theology of the Church is a "fabric woven on high"-- the precise opposite of man-made.[/quote]

Am familiar with those two words. But, not at all familiar with when the Holy Spirit directed the usage elaborate costumes, gold, jewels, elaborate structures, incense, rituals, a strict hierarchy and all the rest. It's all very convenient...only a select few are chosen who can talk to God without a filter, and not so coincidentally, those chosen are the same ones doing the choosing. God vs. Religion.
[/quote]


Harry,

      It's called Apostolic Succession.  Most of the praxis of the Church was derived from the Judaic Temple and synagogues of the first century A.D.-- the structure of the liturgy, psalmody, basilicas, vestiture, and even the form of the eucharistic canon-- which was derived from the Temple rites relating to the tabernacle and the Holy of Holies.

      Not surprising, in that the Church was established by observant Jews in the first century Roman Empire.

      The criteria of authenticity vs. pseudo- (heretical) praxis in the early Church was, 1) Apostolic Succession of the episcopate and priesthood, 2) canonicty-- i.e., praxis and theoria that was consistent with Apostolic (and scriptural) tradition.

      The interesting thing about Martin Luther (and Protestant) SOLA SCRIPURA theology is that it is NOT scriptural-- not in full accord with the Holy Scriptures.

      I had figured that much out by the time I was a (Protestant) teenager-- and could give you numerous examples.

      If you are truly interested in understanding these issues in early Church history, you need to read St. Eusebius Pamphilius's Ecclesiastical History (328 A.D.) and St. Irenaeus of Lyon's Against Heresies (177 A.D.)   Eusebius documents the Apostolic Succession of the early Church, and Ireneaus uses the Holy Scripture to refute the prominent heresies of the first Christian century-- Arianism, Gnosticism, Docetism, Marcionism, etc.

     
[/quote]

All I know is that when I was about 7 or 8 years old and finally old enough to sit in the main church instead of the kid's parish on Sundays, my mother asked something like, how did I feel now that I was sitting in God's house? I looked around and asked if she could point me to who was God and where he might be sitting. I don't recall what she said, but it was something like, "...It's not a person. God is everywhere; he's all around us..." I looked to the rafters and in all the areas of the church and still saw nothing. Honest to God, (pun intended), at that moment, my first day in church with adults, I knew something was seriously wrong with the concept, and I've never recovered any faith after that moment.
[/quote]

      I'm reminded of a story told about St. John (Maximovitch) of San Francisco.   St. John (a miracle worker and clairvoyant Russian Orthodox Archbishop) was visiting Westminster Abbey toward the end of his life.  After standing and praying in the church for awhile, St. John quietly turned to one of his colleagues and said, "There is no Grace here."


St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco

[oujour76]

Apr 24, 2017 11:30:28 GMT -5 DrSchadenfreude said:

It's called Apostolic Succession.  Most of the praxis of the Church was derived from the Judaic Temple and synagogues of the first century A.D.-- the structure of the liturgy, psalmody, basilicas, vestiture, and even the form of the eucharistic canon-- which was derived from the Temple rites relating to the tabernacle and the Holy of Holies.

      Not surprising, in that the Church was established by observant Jews in the first century Roman Empire.

      The criteria of authenticity vs. pseudo- (heretical) praxis in the early Church was, 1) Apostolic Succession of the episcopate and priesthood, 2) canonicty-- i.e., praxis and theoria that was consistent with Apostolic (and scriptural) tradition.

      The interesting thing about Martin Luther (and Protestant) SOLA SCRIPURA theology is that it is NOT scriptural-- not in full accord with the Holy Scriptures.

      I had figured that much out by the time I was a (Protestant) teenager-- and could give you numerous examples.

      If you are truly interested in understanding these issues in early Church history, you need to read St. Eusebius Pamphilius's Ecclesiastical History (328 A.D.) and St. Irenaeus of Lyon's Against Heresies (177 A.D.)   Eusebius documents the Apostolic Succession of the early Church, and Ireneaus uses the Holy Scripture to refute the prominent heresies of the first Christian century-- Arianism, Gnosticism, Docetism, Marcionism, etc.

[/font]
     
[/quote]

Funny thing is you don't what "Sola scriptura" means other than what your propaganda has told you. I suspect that's because your church is threatened by the concept.