Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Bokababe

“Which, in an of itself, says that one needs more than Scripture alone in order to understand Scriptural context. Why is your context of greater value than those of the Church Fathers, Saints and Martyrs?”

The handbook is an abbreviated commentary, I have many commentaries. Since they are not approved by the RCC there is no value to them in your view I take it. I read the Bible, the Church Fathers, commentaries.

“A nifty little history you’ve written there, except that Christ said that He founded a Church that even the Gates of Hell would not prevail against, yet you are basically saying that The Gates of Hell DID prevail against the historical Church. Please tell me when that happened? Before 1040AD or after?”

The gates of hell has not prevailed against the true church. It has prevailed, despite the thousand year tyranny of the RCC. The truth marches on.

“Because you seem to completely ignore that the Orthodox Church even existed or exists —only the Roman Catholic Church seems to have historical significance to you. Why?”

This thread is a RCC vs the scripture type of thread, the former, as usual, arguing for the primacy of Rome. I doubt we’ll see many Orthodox arguing for the primacy of Rome over against the scripture.


78 posted on 05/09/2011 5:42:16 PM PDT by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: sasportas

fascinating post, care to tell us where this “church” was for the first 16 centuries??? care to name a member of this “church” in the second century, just to pick one century?


80 posted on 05/09/2011 5:51:47 PM PDT by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

To: sasportas; Kolokotronis
"This thread is a RCC vs the scripture type of thread, the former, as usual, arguing for the primacy of Rome. I doubt we’ll see many Orthodox arguing for the primacy of Rome over against the scripture."

Actually the author of this article is Orthodox Christian. I posted it and I'm an Orthodox Christian.

I think that you have mistaken both the author and I as Roman Catholic, because when we say "The Church", we really do mean the the Orthodox Church -- not because we Orthodox as individuals are "special" (we are not) or because we have the most cool whizz-bang theologians, but because the Orthodox Church is the only Church that hasn't changed its teaching since the days when there was only one Christian Church, when our Lord gave us His Teachings.

You are incorrect about the Orthodox "not arguing for the primacy of the Pope". The Orthodox too believe in the "primacy of the Pope" but NOT "the supremacy of the Pope".

Short version is that the Orthodox perceive the Pope as "The Vicar (substitute) of Peter", but not as "the Vicar (substitute) of Christ". Our Lord Jesus Christ has no human "substitutes" as the Head of his Church and needs none.

116 posted on 05/09/2011 8:11:24 PM PDT by Bokababe (Save Christian Kosovo! http://www.savekosovo.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson