Has the Catholic Church been the most persecuted of all Christians throughout history?

tom jackson, you admit that the RCC has a hierarchy, something that is not found in Scripture yet the RCC continues the practice. You said the Catholics have strong feelings about Mary. So do I but I don't pray to her nor do I venerate her. May said that Jesus was her Lord which tells me that she never considered herself an equal with Him. Yet the Catholic church does. The Bible doesn't mention the virginity of Mary after the birth of Jesus because she had other son's and daughters after the birth of Jesus. Common sense and biology tells me that Mary was no longer a virgin after she had the other children. Unless of course you're trying to tell me that all of her other sons and daughters were miraculously conceived by the Holy Spirit like Jesus was. Scripture says no such thing but yet the Catholic church does. Who or what do you believe, the Catholic church or the Bible?

Jesus says in John 14:6  "Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."

 Jesus said "I" am the way. Jesus didn't say Mary and I are the way. Who is the only way to the Father? Jesus Christ is. Yet the Catholic church believes and practices that Mary is Co-Redeemer. Scripture says no. I'm not the one saying this about Jesus, the Bible is. If feel the need to believe what the Catholic church says, over and above, the very clear teaching of Scripture then be my guest.

  Before I sign off of this thread, I have a few more things to post about the Catholic church. The Assumption of Mary. The Catholic Church teaches the assumption of Mary. That is, she was "taken up body and soul into heaven," at the time of her death. She is there "exalted as Queen of the Universe." There is no such teaching in Scripture about this. We know that Jesus ascended into heaven after His death, burial and resurrection. But not Mary. And to say that she is the Queen of the Universe is completely contrary to Scripture. You will find no place in Scripture where there is a queen of the universe or a queen of heaven, as Mary is also called. What you will find is that hundreds of years before Christ, there were pagans who worshiped the so-called Queen of Heaven. The Jews began to copy this pagan practice, and it brought the judgment of God upon them. The Lord told the prophet Jeremiah not to pray for them. He said He would not hear the prophet's prayers for them.  (Jer 7:18-20).

  Emphasis on relics. In the Catholic Church, there is a great emphasis on relics. There are many bits and bones that they claim belong to certain saints of long ago. And when people visit the places where these are kept, they hope to receive some kind of blessing for touching the box containing them.But this is also an unbiblical practice. No place in Scripture are we instructed to venerate objects or relics. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence of this kind of idolatry in the Catholic Church around the world.

 Emphasis on saints. Another common practice in the Catholic Church is to venerate certain holy and devout people that have been recognized officially by the Catholic Church as “saints.” There is no place in Scripture that teaches that only certain disciples of Christ are saints and others are not. And we are never taught to talk to the departed saints. Yet this is a common practice of the Catholic Church. It goes directly against the Scriptures that teach us to pray to the Father in Heaven (Mat 6:9), and the warnings in Scripture not to contact the dead (Deut 18:10-11).

There is only one mediator between God and man, and that is Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul wrote: “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” (1Ti 2:5). 

  Traditions of men. There are many traditions in the Catholic Church. One such tradition is kneeling and kissing the ring of the bishop. Another is to make the sign of the cross over one’s chest. Another is devotion to the infant Jesus. Then there’s wearing the brown scapular, wearing the miraculous medal, remembering the feasts of Mary, keeping the first five Saturdays, pilgrimages to Rome and various shrines, lent, advent, incense, bells, candles, cords, cards, and many other things that are not taught in Scripture.  The Word of God must be our sole rule of faith, nothing else. The Catholic Church places the traditions of the church above Scripture, and they nullify the Word of God through their practice of them. This is exactly what Jesus meant when He said, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.’ 

 Remember, you posted 2 Timothy 3:16. If you honestly believe what the Bible is saying there then you must also believe the Bible when it condemns many or most of the beliefs and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. Many of which I outlined above. The Bible is clear on those matters and no amount of adding too, taking away, or flat out ignoring what it says will ever change that.

Saint Peter established the church in Antioch, and was the city's first bishop---simply an example of carrying out the instructions Christ gave the apostles regarding establishment of His Church.  (Of course, since you don't realize that Christ is God, you can't accept that.)

Since you don't understand that, all the rest of your conclusions are understandably erroneous.

Christ IS God.  But then again, SO is St. Peter.  And YOU.  And I.

Not in this context.  The comprehension of the term "God" is focused on here rather than the extension of the term.

You win, Tom.  Because I cannot make myself ever read anything this Mugger contributes as an answer. 

I gave up years ago. 

Nothing in the Bible call's Peter a Bishop or Pope. 
Based on the history of Bishops Pope's, if Peter was a Catholic Bishop or Pope, why didn't he have Paul burned alive for exposing his error?

(Galatians 2:11-14) However, when Ceʹphas came to Antioch, I resisted him face-to-face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 For before certain men from James arrived, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcised class. 13 The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense, so that even Barʹna·bas was led along with them in their pretense. 14 But when I saw that they were not walking in step with the truth of the good news, I said to Ceʹphas before them all: “If you, though you are a Jew, live as the nations do and not as Jews do, how can you compel people of the nations to live according to Jewish practice?”



If Peter was a Bishop or Pope, why didn't he accept people bowing to him like other Pope's?

(Acts 10:24-28) The following day he entered into Caes·a·reʹa. Cornelius, of course, was expecting them and had called together his relatives and close friends. 25 As Peter entered, Cornelius met him, fell down at his feet, and did obeisance to him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying: “Rise; I too am just a man.” 27 As he conversed with him, he went in and found many people assembled. 28 He said to them: “You well know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or approach a man of another race, and yet God has shown me that I should call no man defiled or unclean.

tom jackson. Firstly, never assume that you know what I accept and don't accept and what I understand or don't understand. That's an adolescent ploy used by many Catholics. Secondly no, Peter did not establish the church and no, Peter was not the first bishop (Pope) The church of Christ is correctly called the church of Christ for several reasons. Such designation is not a denominational name nor the only exclusive name by which the Bible refers to the church. But because Christ founded the church and because he is the very foundation of the church it is very appropriately called the church of Christ.

  In Matthew 16:18 Jesus said to Simon Peter, "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." From this passage it is very obvious that Christ is the builder or founder of the New Testament church and that he calls this church his church. Any church founded by someone other than Christ is not Christ's church. David, in the Old Testament, announced a great truth when he said, "Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it" (Psalm 127:1). In the New Testament we learn that the "house of God is the church of the living God" (1 Timothy 3:15). If the Lord did not build the house (church) those who did build it labored in vain. Jesus declared, "Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up" (Matthew 15:13). No one should be a member of any spiritual household, religious plant, or church which man was responsible for starting. One should be a member of the church Christ established!

  The apostle Paul makes this whole thing abundantly clear when he states, "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 3:11). The founder of the first church is Jesus, not Peter, not Paul. The foundation of the first church is Jesus, not Peter, not Paul. The church Christ established and which is founded on him, was started in the city of Jerusalem, on the first day of Pentecost following the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2). The prophets had long predicted the coming kingdom of the Messiah (Isaiah 2:2-4); Daniel 2:44). This kingdom was not a physical kingdom but a spiritual one (John 18:36) and was realized in the founding of the church by Christ. The church, who was founded by and who's Foundation is Jesus Christ, was founded in Jerusalem not Antioch.

  After his resurrection Christ appeared to his apostles and said, "Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in my name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" (Luke 24:46,47). Then in Acts 1:8, just before he ascended back to heaven, Christ said to the apostles, "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." 

  Notice it said "beginning" in "Jerusalem", not Antioch. Back to Peter then I'll give this a rest. The Roman Catholic Church sees Peter as the first pope upon whom God had chosen to build His church (Matthew 16:18). It holds that he had authority (primacy) over the other apostles. The Roman Catholic Church maintains that sometime after the recorded events of the book of Acts, the Apostle Peter became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishop was accepted by the early church as the central authority among all of the churches. It teaches that God passed Peter’s apostolic authority to those who later filled his seat as bishop of Rome. This teaching that God passed on Peter’s apostolic authority to the subsequent bishops is referred to as “apostolic succession.”

  The Roman Catholic Church also holds that Peter and the subsequent popes were and are infallible when addressing issues “ex cathedra,” from their position and authority as pope. It teaches that this infallibility gives the pope the ability to guide the church without error. The Roman Catholic Church claims that it can trace an unbroken line of popes back to St. Peter, citing this as evidence that it is the true church, since, according to "their interpretation" of Matthew 16:18, Christ built His church upon Peter.  

  But while Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel (part of the meaning behind (Matthew 16:18-19), the teaching of Scripture, taken in context, nowhere declares that he was in authority over the other apostles, or over the church. See Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; and 1 Peter 5:1-5. Nor is it ever taught in Scripture that the bishop of Rome, or any other bishop, was to have primacy over the church. Scripture does not even explicitly record Peter even being in Rome. 

  Also, nowhere does Scripture state that, in order to keep the church from error, the authority of the apostles was passed on to those they ordained (the idea behind apostolic succession). Apostolic succession is “read into” those verses that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support this doctrine (2 Timothy 2:2; 4:2-5; Titus 1:5; 2:1; 2:15; 1 Timothy 5:19-22). Paul does NOT call on believers in various churches to receive Titus, Timothy, and other church leaders based on their authority as bishops or their having apostolic authority, but rather based upon their being fellow laborers with him 1 Corinthians 16:10, 16:16; 2 Corinthians 8:23).

  What Scripture DOES teach is that false teachings would arise even from among church leaders, and that Christians were to compare the teachings of these later church leaders with Scripture, which alone is infallible. Catholics rely upon what the Roman Catholic Church says not upon what Scripture says. To clarify again, was Peter the first pope? The answer, according to Scripture, is a clear and emphatic “no.” Peter nowhere claims supremacy over the other apostles. Nowhere in his writings (1 and 2 Peter) did the Apostle Peter claim any special role, authority, or power over the church. Nowhere in Scripture does Peter, or any other apostle, state that their apostolic authority would be passed on to successors. Scripture and not the Catholic Church, is where the authority. No amount of taking away, adding too, and twisting Scripture by the Catholic Church will ever change that.
  

What is truly said is that you are the child of a lesser God and therefore choose to live in error.

We acknowledge Mary's importance in the economy of God's salvation.  Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother... When Jesus saw His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, here is your son.” Then He said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” 

In Greek, the negation until implies nothing about what happens afterwards. 

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G2193&t=KJV

Strongs
ἕως héōs, heh'-oce; of uncertain affinity; a conjunction, preposition and adverb of continuance, until (of time and place):—even (until, unto), (as) far (as), how long, (un-)til(-l), (hither-, un-, up) to, while(-s).

I can't quote Thayer's but it reads pretty much the same.

That's what I was thinking. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that they are the persecuted rather than the persecutors. 

(Catholic Encyclopedia)
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11703a.htm
"But most deplorable of all persecutions have been those that Catholicism has suffered from other Christians."

Sounds like the JW's are the one's doing the persecuting on this site.

In other threads you try to justify the torture, burning at the stake and other forms of murder by your Church and you feel persecuted?

Sorry, Tex, it's time to close the door on your visit.  That's the nice thing about when you stop by unannounced---it's as easy to get rid of you as it is to see the error in your theology.

tom jackson, what's the bottom line here?  Scripture or Catholic doctrine?  What is your final authority in faith and practice, the Bible or the Catholic Church? People often attempt to give human traditions higher authority than God’s Word. This was true of the Jews of Jesus' day. In refuting the errors of the Sadducees, the Scripture records the Lord saying, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God” (Matthew 22:29). Jesus continually rebuked the Pharisees because they made their traditions on a par with the Word of God—corrupting the very basis of truth by equating their traditions with God’s Word. So He said to them in Mark 7:13  " Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which you have delivered: and many such like things do you."

  The Roman Catholic Church is notorious for placing it's traditions and rituals above the authority of Scripture. Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the final authority, it alone is the final judge of tradition. However, since the Roman Catholic Church recognizes the Pope rather than Scripture as it's final authority, the Bible to them becomes secondary. 

  Can the teachings and practices of the Roman Catholic Church be found in the Bible? What about the authority of the Pope, what about church councils, traditions, and church law? Do the Scriptures authorize the teachings of Catholicism about the mass (eucharist), transubstantiation, purgatory, indulgences, abstinence, celibacy, Lent, confessions to priests, immaculate conception, and prayer to saints and Mary? Is the Catholic church really the one true church according to the Bible?

 In addition to the Bible, Catholicism also follows tradition and the decrees of the Pope and church councils as religious authority. For the Catholics who say that their traditions and decrees are not above  Biblical authority, refer to the following.

  "Did God intend that the Bible alone should be the guide to salvation? No, because certain things in the Bible can be misunderstood, and because the Bible does not have everything God taught" - Catechism, p. 51.

  "Do we get from the Bible alone all our knowledge and certainty about what God has told us? No, there is also Sacred Tradition … What is tradition? The Word of God handed on to us by the Apostles in their preaching and by their successors in the church to the present day … Do you have to believe in tradition? Yes … we are obliged to accept all the truths contained in the Bible and Tradition…" - Catechism, pp. 9,10.

  "Council … assemblies of the rulers of the Church legally convoked, for the discussion and decision of ecclesiastical affairs … The decrees of general councils have no binding authority till confirmed by the Pope … The infallibility of general councils so confirmed follows from that of the Church…" - Dictionary, pp. 227-230.

  "Does Jesus require us to follow the Pope in matters of religion? Yes, because obedience and loyalty to the Pope are among the chief requirements of Our Lord's plan for unity … Can the Pope make an error when teaching religion? Not when he is speaking solemnly (ex cathedra) as head of the church. Then he has that special protection from error which God gives as a spiritual safeguard for all the members of the church" - Catechism, p. 56.

  Now, in regards to the above official Catholic Catechism and dictionary, the Bible says this about it. Numbered for easy access and reading.

1.  The original apostles received all the truth we need to guide us to eternal life, and they wrote this down in the Scriptures (John 16:13; 2 Pet. 1:3; Acts 20:20,27; Matt. 28:20; I Cor. 14:37; 2 Tim. 3:16,17).

2. The teachings of these inspired writers can be understood by the common people. We do not need official interpreters to understand the word, but we should use the word to check out the teachers! (Mark 7:14; 2 Tim. 3:16,17; John 20:30,31; Acts 17:11; Psalms. 119:105)

3. We displease God when we follow tradition or church laws or any human standard as the source of authority for the church (Matt. 15:1-14; Collosians. 2:8; Galatians. 1:6-9; Prov. 14:12; 2 John 9-11; Jeremiah. 10:23).

  Sorry tom jackson, it's time to close the door on your humanistic, heretical, man-centered, barbaric, and apostate Roman Catholic Church. Mainly because you consciously and deliberately choose to ignore what Scripture has to declare about your false beliefs. 

Interesting.

Glad you found it interesting because I thought it was a little too long after I posted it. I'm usually pretty reserved in my approach, I have no problem with being politically incorrect. Also I try to keep my answer as concise as possible but sometimes  my passion gets the best of me and I carry on a little too long. It bothers me that people don't see the Roman Catholic Church for what it really is, a pseudo religion with political leanings. But what do you expect from those who rarely pick up a Bible to dust it off let alone read it.

Shar to the Rona, thankfully I'm not your brother.