What is the actual evidence that the "Jesus Christ" described in the

D

DreamstuffEntity

Member
bible exists, and established the..? ...Catholic church?

Posted a few minutes ago:

"Catholic Church was established by Jesus Christ. Scriptures prove it. Church history proves it..Secular History proves it"

What is the proof?

Note: logical fallacies like appeal to ignorance, negative proof/burden of proof, and special pleading are not proof; neither are quotes from the bible, insults, claims that I already have evidence, links to websites that allegedly have evidence, personal experiences, self-fulfilling or vague prophecies matched against millennia of history, or anecdotes which have a natural explanation or no supporting evidence. I'm looking for the actual proof we were told exists. That claim is the reason I'm asking.
 
R

Richard&BrendaF

New member
As far as Jesus starting the catholic church, i am not catholic and as far as i am aware of, there is no proof that Jesus started the catholic church (Jesus was a practicing Jew). But to say Jesus did not exist requires one to discard a lot of documented writing of the time, both Jewish and gentile, religious authors and atheistic authors. To quote one source found very easily on the internet...

Still, to put to rest the notion that there is no historic and scientific proof of Jesus outside the Bible, we may look to Jewish historian Flavius Josephus and to Roman historian Carius Cornelius Tacitus - both well known and accepted.

Josephus, in the book Jewish Antiquities" wrote:

"At that time lived Jesus, a wise man, if he may be called a man; for he performed many wonderful works. He was a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. . . .And when Pilate, at the instigation of the chief men among us, had condemned him to the cross, they who before had conceived an affection for him did not cease to adhere to him. For on the third day he appeared to them alive again, the divine prophets having foretold these and many other wonderful things concerning him. And the sect of the Christians, so called from him, subsists at this time" (Antiquities, Book 18, Chapter 3, Section 1).

Tacitus, in writing about accusations that Nero burned the city of Rome and blamed it on Christians, said the following:

". . .Nero procured others to be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishment upon those people, who were in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the name of Christians. They had their denomination from Christus (Christ, dm.), who in the reign of Tibertius was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate. . . .At first they were only apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast multitude discovered by them, all of which were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. . . ." (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44).
 
C

CArl

Member
It is really simple actually. It is a matter of history. Thus, it can be proved or disproved based solely on that.
If there was another Church besides the Catholic Church in early Christianity then tell me what it is. If you can't then I am not surprised. However, I can give you historical facts that show the Catholic Church existed as the early Church. You can read for instance the writings of the early Church Fathers, the Apostolic Fathers. The Apostolic Fathers are called Apostolic because they lived during the lifetime of the Apostles.

St. Ignatius, Apostolic Father, Bishop of Antioch (where they were first called Christians - Acts 11:26), and student of John the Apostle, wrote in AD 110:

"Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid." — Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8, J.R. Willis translation.

On the matter of the Eucharist he wrote what is consistent with Catholic teaching:

"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes."
— Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1

Ignatius wrote a number of letters that describe the importance of following the Bishop. For example:

"Take care to do all things in harmony with God, with the bishop presiding in the place of God, and with the presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles, and with the deacons, who are most dear to me, entrusted with the business of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father from the beginning and is at last made manifest."
—Letter to the Magnesians 2, 6:1

Ignatius warned against falling away to strange doctrines, ie. things not orthodox and contrary to the Church's teachings on things like the Eucharist or practicing the Lord's Day:

"Be not seduced by strange doctrines nor by antiquated fables, which are profitless. For if even unto this day we live after the manner of Judaism, we avow that we have not received grace.... If then those who had walked in ancient practices attained unto newness of hope, no longer observing Sabbaths but fashioning their lives after the Lord's day, on which our life also arose through Him and through His death which some men deny ... how shall we be able to live apart from Him? ... It is monstrous to talk of Jesus Christ and to practise Judaism. For Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity"
— Ignatius to the Magnesians 8:1, 9:1-2, 10:3, Lightfoot translation.

Due to space I can not write much more except to say there are many Church Fathers who have written about the Catholic Church and the need to follow it as Christ's Church, lest one fall away into error. If there was another Church where is it? We have no record of it? The Churches that Paul and Peter went around establishing in Acts, like Rome, Corinth, Antioch, etc. These are the beginning of the Catholic Church. There wasn't one church in Acts and then all of a sudden the Catholic Church. No, where do you think the Catholic Church comes from, but from these same churches started by the apostles?

The Pope for instance has Apostolic Succession to St. Peter. That means we can trace a line of bishops all the way back to St. Peter.

As far as Jesus being real. Do you really think that people would go around spreading an imaginary Jesus, dying for an imaginary Jesus, and that an imaginary Jesus would be so successful that billions of people around the world would claim to believe in him? It doesn't make sense. Occams razor - the simplest solution says that with so many people that believe in him and even die for him, then he must be real.
 
Top