Where'd Your Religion Come From?

[Black Knight MI]

This is very interesting.

This column by Ann Landers appeared in The Arizona Republic newspaper on Wednesday, November 20, 1996

Dear Readers: Do you have any idea when your religion was founded and by whom? If you are not interested in the subject, skip today's column and go directly to the horoscope. I found the following fascinating:

If you are a member of the Jewish faith, your religion was founded by Abraham about 4,000 years ago.

If you are Hindu, your religion developed in India around l,500 B.C.

If you are a Buddhist, your religion split from Hinduism and was founded by Buddha, Prince Siddhartha Gautama of India, about 500 B.C.

If you are Roman Catholic, Jesus Christ began your religion in the year A.D. 30.

If you are Islamic, Mohammed started your religion in what is now Saudi Arabia around A.D. 600.

If you are Eastern Orthodox, your sect separated from Roman Catholicism around the year 1054.

If you are Lutheran, your religion was founded by Martin Luther, an ex-monk in the Catholic Church, in 1517.

If you belong to the Church of England (Anglican), your religion was founded by King Henry VIII in the year 1534 because the pope would not grant him a divorce with the right to remarry.

If you are a Presbyterian, your religion was founded when John Knox brought the teachings of John Calvin to Scotland in the Year 1560.

If you are Unitarian, your group developed in Europe in the 1500s.

If you are a Congregationalist, your religion branched off Puritanism in the early 1600s in England.

If you are a Baptist, you owe the tenets of your religion to John Smyth, who launched it in Amsterdam in 1607.

If you are a Methodist, your religion was founded by John and Charles Wesley in England in 1744.

If you are an Episcopalian, your religion came from England to the American colonies. It formed a separate religion founded by Samuel Seabury in 1789.

f you are a Mormon (Latter-day Saints), Joseph Smith started your church in Palmyra, N.Y. in 1830.

If you worship with the Salvation Army, your sect began with William Booth in London in 1865.

If you are a Christian Scientist, you look to 1879 as the year your religion was founded by Mary Baker Eddy.

If you are a Jehovah's Witness, your religion was founded by Charles Taze Russell in Pennsylvania in the 1870s.

If you are Pentecostal, your religion was started in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1901.

If you are an agnostic, you profess an uncertainty or a skepticism about the existence of God.

If you are an atheist, you do not believe in the existence of God.

 

[Economist]

I didn't realize the Salvation Army is a religion.

 

[Scott1]

** MOD POST **

From the FAQ Forum RULES:
4.) Each individual religion forum is there for that religion's education and people who abide by that religion to discuss in their religious conversations. We will not tolerate any outside debate about that specific religion in that specific forum. If you wish to have some inner debate about the context in that post within that religion that is fine, BUT NO OUTSIDE DEBATE OR VIEW POINTS ALLOWED. We have other forums for that specific reason.

This member posted the thread in the Roman Catholic section....not a debate or discussion forum.... please keep comments unrelated to this topic out of the thread.

Scott

 

[johnnys4life]

Surely someone must have been the "first" Catholic Pope? Surely there must have been a time when it "officially" began?

 

[Crystallas]

Well.. First Official Pope was Gelasius in 492. But the Pontificate has been a tradition since Peter.
But with the apostiles and the way we view a Pope today has significantly changed. But it has not taken away from any of these great mans lives. You may even read how there was the rebellion from Peter with Simon Magus and how his views became rejected by Peter. This is also an interesting read and it becomes more so a debate because he used the word Catholic in its raw non-modern day propper meaning, which it means "universal to all." So this lead a lot of followers to believe that Peter was a "Pope" but not a "Catholic Pope." But of course Peter wasnt, this wouldnt mean that the foundation of the Catholic Churches Pontificate royalty was derived elsewhere.
I dont know if that made any sence, but this is a question that cannot be answered, thats the only reason why I say Pope Gelasius was the first. He was Official, and held the title Pope and not only Pontificate.

 

[goodjewishboy]

The pontificate was a position in Ancient Rome. The Pontif Maximus was the master bridge builder long before the Church took the title.

 

[huajiro]

Thanks for the info

 

[Scott1]

Well.. First Official Pope was Gelasius in 492. But the Pontificate has been a tradition since Peter.

"Official"???.... nonesense...

....the Primacy of Peter is based upon the episcopate in Rome... the original title of the Papacy was the "Vicar of Peter".

According to a well-known Catholic theologian:
"The essential point, in my opinion, has already become plain: the martyrdom of Peter in Rome fixes the place where his function continues. The awareness of this fact can be detected as early as the first century in the Letter of Clement,..."

But with the apostiles and the way we view a Pope today has significantly changed.

Not much... but yes, it has changed a bit over the years. Vatican II helped "steer the ship" back closer to the true nature of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

And to clear up another error about the Papacy:

The most noteworthy of the titles are Papa, Summus Pontifex, Pontifex Maximus, Servus servorum Dei. The title pope (papa) was, as has been stated, at one time employed with far more latitude. In the East it has always been used to designate simple priests. In the Western Church, however, it seems from the beginning to have been restricted to bishops (Tertullian, "De Pud." 13). It was apparently in the fourth century that it began to become a distinctive title of the Roman Pontiff. Pope Siricius (d. 398) seems so to use it (Ep. vi in P. L., XIII, 1164), and Ennodius of Pavia (d. 473) employs it still more clearly in this sense in a letter to Pope Symmachus (P. L., LXIII, 69). Yet as late as the seventh century St. Gall (d. 640) addresses Desiderius of Cahors as papa (P. L., LXXXVII, 265). Gregory VII finally prescribed that it should be confined to the successors of Peter.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12260a.htm

 

[James the Persian]

Scott,

Just a minor correction to your quote from New Advent. The title Pope has not always been used to signify simple priests in the East. A related word is used in the Romanian church for this, but it is more of a popular than official term. I don't know if this is the case in other local churches, but the wordsin Romanian are Popa for an Orthodox priest and Papa for a Pope. The usual word for a priest, however, is Preot. The point at which the quote certainly errs, however, is in saying the title is used only for simple priests. This is not the case at all. The usual title for the Patriarch of Alexandria and all Africa as well as the Coptic Patriarch is, and always has been, the Pope of Alexandria (which is why many Orthodox refer to your Pope as the 'Pope of Rome' rather than simply Pope). The East, then does have, amongst both my and the Oriental Orthodox communions, the tradition of applying the title Pope to particular Patriarchs and not just simple priests.

James

 

[Scott1]

Thanks James.

 

[Scarlett]

My spiritulism seems to have always been there. Although both my parents were catholic and I had been baptised as such. I feel I had a personal relationship from the begining when I started always talking to God. I devoloped this exercise of confession and communicating in church since I was little, and found that after I relieved my burdens to the Lord that I felt better about life. Carefree!
That is where I believe religion truly began. What do you think?

 

[Scott1]

What do you think?

Sounds good to me!