Based in Ohio

@sola_chad Catholics act like there wasn't Scripture for the first 400 years of Christianity until they showed up with full magisterium.

God gave us the Bible through the apostles—not the Catholic Church. Their teachings were rooted in existing Scripture and later written down as Scripture. The early church treated these writings as authoritative and they were circulated and read aloud in different congregations.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Men received the Holy Spirit in Scripture without even talking to the apostles. Yet you claim we can only have it through the Catholic Church because of succession. Clearly blasphemy.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff That objection only works if Catholics were claiming every later bishop has the same kind of authority as an Apostle. We don’t. The Apostles had a unique, unrepeatable role. The Church’s bishops are their Apostolic successors, but not apostles themselves. What continues isn’t 1/

If you’re arguing that “the Septuagint” or “the Dead Sea Scrolls,” both included certain books, and on that basis we must have those books in our Bibles today, then you have a big problem. Both “the Septuagint” and “the Dead Sea Scrolls” are mini-libraries — they include documents considered both scriptural and non-scriptural in their day. 

For example, the Letter of Aristeas, 3rd and 4th Maccabees, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Testament of Job, the Life of Adam and Eve, the Psalms of Solomon, and the Assumption of Moses are all part of the Septuagint collections. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, The Community Rule, recordings of the last words of Joseph, Judah, Levi, Naphtali, and Amram (the father of Moses) were amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. Few (if any) of these books are considered scripture today by modern Christian or Jewish groups.

Both the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls are representative of ancient library collections — collections that contained scripture but that were not themselves wholly considered scripture. We today group them in these convenient categories with these helpful titles, but it is a misunderstanding to think of them as, or necessarily representative of, a single thing.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff You guys totally claim apostolic authority. You call the Pope the vicar of Christ, let him speak excathedral, have officially canonized Marian practices, claim noone saved outside the Catholic Church. You gave your bishops and popes more authority than even the apostles had.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff We trust the Holy Spirit and God and his ability to accomplish his will even with scripture transmission. They did it for 300 years before Rome showed up to claim credit for canonization. While you guys solely rely on mortal Men to tell you what is right.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Ah yes, Gish gallop. None of this is true, but let’s say it is. You’re still left with the same problem: if the Church rapidly corrupted after the Apostles, how do we trust the canon recognized in that same period? Why trust early transmission of Scripture but 1/

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff I didn't say it rapidly corrupted. I don't think bad Eucharist understanding affects salvation. Even then Marian theology was not official until the last hundred years. The level of idolatry that it's grown to is a problem, works based salvation problematic.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff I have no problem with Protestant disagreeing with each other. It is generally minor theology not affecting salvation, And it is complete folly to say any denomination fully understands God when even Peter was reprimanded by Paul after obtaining the Holy Spirit.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Really? So is baptism necessary & regenerative? Is the Eucharist truly the Body & Blood of Christ? Is the Mass a propitiatory sacrifice? Are bishops the successors of the Apostles & necessary in the Church? Etc. Protestants don’t even agree with each other on these.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff And if you do maintain that popes canceling popes didn't affect apostolic succession then that same logic would apply to you being unable to cancel Luther's ordination in that succession.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Luke 19:40 NIV [40] “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.” There is no mandate for a pope or magisterium in the New testament. If the rocks are willing to cry out U think it's after centuries of corruption that rc maintained any authority?

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Christ clearly explained symbology of the Eucharist. You guys just stop reading the chapter before he gets there. RC Eucharist theology also blasphemies the Holy Spirit. If the spirit indwells within each believer why do you need to recharge God's power?

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Mark 1:8 NIV [8] I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” Do you deny John's words? bible.com/bible/111/mrk.…

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff I've not shown any of my theology other than pointing out the heresies of the Catholic Church. There are weird theologies in the Protestantism but few of them blasphemy the Holy Spirit worship mortals and deny the grace of Christ like Catholicism. Butnone of them affect salvation

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Which flavor of Protestantism are you using as your own filter to see & understand that “original context”? You are steeped in 16th-17th c. theology so much, that you can only view early Christianity thru an anachronistic lens. 🙄

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Agree that a lot of the original touched upon scriptural themes and ideas were maintained it is the secondary information you guys have added. Even Catholics claim their theology evolved over time which is their way of saying they added nonsense not found in the Bible

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff and they preserved teaching through succession, liturgy, & councils. Without that, you don’t prevent distortion but you do guarantee it. 2/

@sparklingxnacho @JohnMB69 @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Yeah that makes sense. And Catholics check their brain at the door and let others do all the thinking and talking for them. Heaven forbid people read the Bible in it it's original context and not through the filter of a pope and bishops who were largely of a Roman background

@BasedinOhio777 @JohnMB69 @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff everyone is aware protestantism is proto-rationalism. u dont have to say it

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Secondly Marian, purgatory, The office of Pope. They weren't touched upon by Christ and the apostles because they didn't exist. And the further away we got from the originals the more theological wiggle room and adding to scripture where it was silent has corrupted Catholicism.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Absurd. There’s a continuous line from the Apostles thru their disciples to later bishops. The Fathers weren’t inventing doctrine but were defending what they received. If the Church had no authority after the Apostles, you wouldn’t even have a settled NT let alone Christology.

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff They may have been wise men, even positively contributed, but they are not early, they are not connected to Jesus or the apostle, which is why they are theorizing not explaining. It's a notable difference, it removes their authority to add traditions and extra biblical theology.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff These aren’t isolated figures 400 years removed but they’re part of a continuous succession of bishops, teaching, liturgy, & doctrine. The people in 400 AD didn’t invent Christianity, they inherited it. Calling Athanasius or Augustine “too late” would be more like saying 1/

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff What nonsense? Our current political climate is proof positive that the further we get from the original source the more people twist misinterpret or simply do not understand the original context or the intent of the founders.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff The U.S. Constitution wasn’t really understood until 1800–1850, so we shouldn’t trust those interpretations. That’s absurd. Those later figures are exactly the ones who clarified the meaning of earlier texts, settled disputes, & preserved continuity. 2/

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff What kind of retarded claim is that? How did men 400 years after the apostles know them?

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff First, your analogy would only work if the ACLU had known the Founders, preserved the documents from the start, settled disputes about which writings were authentic, & had universal recognition across the country as the authority to do so. None of this did they do. 1/

@JohnMB69 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff The Catholic claim of them owning the cannon is literally the equivalent of The ACLU putting a USA founding canon documents on The Constitution declaration of Independence etc imprinting everything into one textbook.

@BasedinOhio777 @sparklingxnacho @C2Antiquity @WesleyLHuff Appealing to “just Scripture” assumes you already know which books are Scripture & that list comes from the same early Church you’re dismissing. You’re not avoiding history, you’re dependent upon it. 🙄