Had it not been for the Catholic Church, there would be no New Testament today. It was written by eight Catholic bishops, namely Matthew, Mark, Kuke, John, Paul, Peter, James, and Jude. It was the Catholic Church, at the Council of Hippo in 393 a.d., that met and decided which books would go in the Bible and which ones not. What is the New Testament, except a history of the early days of the Catholic Church?

But what is the New Testament, except a history of the early days of the Catholic Church?

Okay Share, if the Catholic Church didn't put the Bible together, who did? Do you think the Bible dropped from tge sky one day?

Answer the question, please. Who put the Bible together and in what year?

Answer the question, please. Who put the Bible together and in what year?

i already answered that...you should read what others share. just go back a few
pages.

and btw....i cannot believe you are wasting a moments time with cuppocrap! she is a
total and complete fake and a agitator and trouble maker.

Had Constantine lost the battle he would never have taken over the empire. Under Constantine sweeping changes were instituted that formed what now is called the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church did not develop naturally from within the early Church. Had Constantine been a non-issue the Catholic Church would not exist or may have taken several hundred years more to develop.

The first, second and third century (33AD through 300 AD) Churches had all of the writings of the Hebrew scriptures and of the Apostles. Just because the Church leaders hadn't canonized "the Bible" as a single group of books they existed individually and the Church was getting along just fine. In fact the early Church was more dependent on the Holy Spirit for direction and wisdom. Constantine took that away from the Church by claiming the Church leaders now would give them guidance. By doing so, Constantine left the average believer out and set the Catholic Church up for trouble. Reading the scriptures and hearing from God was discouraged for the next 1000 years. It finally resulted in the Reformation where half of Europe split from the Roman Catholic Church.

Yes, having the Bible is handy but, again, they still existed and being used.

just follow the money......unfortunately the catholic church and its popes and priestly
'fathers' was all about gaining control of all the gold and finery...and making the
people unwitting paupers who were easy to indoctrinate...

sound familiar?

It doesn't matter to you, FJO, because you don't believe in the Bible...

The Catholic Church also claimed the "true", God breathed Holy Bible to be a "dead book." The Catholic Church did put together a Bible .... the Catholic Bible ... and gave to the Catholics after they deleted from, added to, changed and wrote into it many things that the Catholics teach and believe .... unbiblical things. Don't have time now to refer to my research for the Pope's name and year. Will provide that later. As for the "true", God breathed Scripture ... Holy Bible ... the Jews and Christians (NOT CATHOLICS) gave us the "true" Holy Bible. The Catholic Church also BURNED the "true" Holy Bible. In doing so, the Catholic Popes could control and teach false doctrine to the people. Regarding low's claim of referencing his information as proof, he's referencing Catholic written history which is filled with untruths that benefit ONLY the Catholic church.

The Catholic Church was founded, not by Constantine, but by Jesus Christ. From the very beginning, the Church had a pope (Peter), bishops (the apostles), priests (elders), and the Mass (the Breaking of the Bread).

Bible reading? During the first century a.d. there was no Bible, at least no New Testament. The Catholic Church didn't decide which set of books made up the New Testament until 393 a.d., about fifty years after Constantine's death. Also, during the period of history we are talking about, only about two or three percent of the population could read at all, according to Dr. Bart Ehrman. After Constantine made Christianity legal the Church was able to establish some schools here and there, but well into the late Middle Ages the majority of people were illiterate, even in their own language. Also, there were no printing presses until 1450---Bibles had to be hand copied, and were very expensive. It could take months to produce just one copy.

Not all priests, past or present, were/are good. Judas Iscariot was not good. Simon Magus was not good (scholars aren't sure if he were a priest or not). St. Paul complained of "false brethren". That doesn't matter---the Church and her work goes on. Even a bad priest can forgive sins in the confessional. Even bad priests can turn bread and wine into Jesus' Body and Blood. According to Dante and to many saints, the worst punishments of Hell are reserved for bad priests. "To whom much is given much will be expected", said Jesus.

Scripture alone as the rule of faith? Not only is it not niblical (2 Thessalonians 2:15, :14 in some translations), not only was it not possible for early and medieval Christians as most of them were illiterate, and couldn't afford Bibles even ifvthey were literate, nobody even heard of this doctrine until Martin Luther invented it some fifteen centuries after the time of Christ.

Jesus founded the Church to be one organized body that would teach the same set of xoctrines at all times and places, and that's exactly what we find in the book of Acts and throughout Paul's epistles. Notice we don't find thousands of denominations, each one teaching something different than the one down the street.

Imagine a Christian worship service of say, 75 a.d. Did the priest get before the congregation and say, open your Bibles to Revelation 2:1, or 3:2, or 22:5 or whatever? Did he quote John 3:16 (one of my favorite verses, by the way)? No. First off, the gospel of John and the book of Revelation had not yet been written. Second off, scripture was written down in scroll form, and carrying around fifty scrolls was just not possible. Third off, most Christians and non-Christians were illiterate. Fourth off, books of any nature were way too expensive for the ordinary person, as all books had to be hand copied. Carrying one's Bible to church meeting and reading it? Not possible.

If the early Christians didn't have Bibles, what did they go by? They went by the oral teachings of the Church's clergy, as described at 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Oh by the way, dividing the Bible into chapters and verses didn't happen until the late Middle Ages.

But the concepts of pope and Mass are there, and concepts are more important than words. In fact, the only reason we have words is to convey concepts.

Funny you should quote the Bible, that anthology of books the Catholic Church put together.

Matthew 16:18 proves Jesus founded the Catholic Church.

Further proof: the book of Acts presents us only one Church, not a gazillion denominations, and that Church had a pope (Peter), bishops (the apostles), priests (elders), and the Mass (the Breaking of the Bread).

Quote from ludlowlowell:
Clearly you are a moral and spiritual degenerate to think the way you do, Ludlow.

Read up on the Albigensian, Anglican, and Huguenot heresies, and you will see how violent these heresies were.