Posted on 06/27/2009 10:01:54 AM PDT by Salvation
Mormons do not believe that faith in Jesus is sufficient for salvation. That alone shows they do not accept the Bible as written.
Jehovah’s Witnesses likewise do not believe in the Trinity, thus not accepting the Bible as written.
The Dalai Lama believes in the Bible. Anton LaVey believed in the Bible. They do not accept the truths within it as inerrent and final. That is what marks them as not Christian.
Another mark: a person must accept Jesus as their personal Savior. That can only be known by two people: Jesus and the person. No one else can know that relationship.
Doing the latter, without the former, may mark you as a person who believes in the redemptive power of Jesus, but not a Christian.
Absolutely! Herein lies the problem with the Protestant approach: they actually believe that any man can understand God by reading the Bible, and thereby formulate a comprehensive theology.
But, in some respects, they are not to blame. In the Bible they read that the Holy Spirit will teach them everything they need to to know, and they assume that this will literally happen by reading the Bible! The only problem is: the Bible says no such thing!
The earliest Church realized that God is, as the Orthodox catechism says, "beyond everything," a supreme Mystery that is not ours to comprehend. The early Church theologians you mention knew their scriptures and their ancient languages better than we do, and they struggled for three centuries before they could define what it is that the Church believes in because the more they looked into the Divine Mystery the more difficult it became to comprehend.
Today, the Church teaching is a sum-total of all the minds the Church produced in the past 2,000 years and, as you say, we are only beginning to scratch the surface, if at all. No single individual can contain that much knowledge by himself, which is probably why Christ left us a community and not a single leader.
Lots of sects believe in Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. It's what they believe about them that is not exactly the same.
Most of all, one has to believe that Jesus is the Son of God, who was sent to Earth to save us from our sins
Perhaps you can explain how can God who is one and indivisible have a Son and still be single, simple and indivisible? Was he sent or did he come down from heavens? Was he raised from the dead or did he raise himself on the third day? Or do you believe in three Gods?
**pristine past**
And what of your church? Do they support abortion?
Do they support euthanasia?
Do they support contraception?
Do they support homosexuality?
Do they support stem cell research and the destroying of embryos to do so?
The Catholic Church has stood staunchly and firmly on all these issues. Yes, the past may not be all pristine, but is any church’s past pristine? It borders on the edge of being a truly ridiculous statement.
They do. They also believe Jesus is a brother of Satan and they believe God the Father has a body and used to be a man before he became God.
Or does it matter what one believes as long as they claim Jesus is their savior? Read Matthew 25 and see why this is not the case, why many who believe to be Christians will not meet the requirements.
Lessee, I think mine was built in 1960, but they’ve added on since then.
If is so sad, you should stop posting.
Stalin purged tens of millions of ORTHODOX laity, clergy, and hierarchs (in addition to the Jews he persecuted).
The Soviet State (beginning with Lenin) destroyed 98% of Orthodox churches and killed some 100,000 (not millions) of clergy, from bishops to monastics and nuns. ironically, Stalin actually, revived Orthodoxy as a way to bring Russian soldiers to fight German occupation.
Greece has always been (well, since the Schism anyway) and certainly would remain under the EP and Constantinople
Greece is not under Constantinople, not all of it at least. The EP has some 30% jurisdiction over Greek territory, but the Church of Greece is an autocephalous Church with the Metropolitan (not Patriarch) in the patriarchal capacity.
There is an American Orthodox Church, but it's called Orthodox Church of America, OCA, headed by a Metropolitan. It is recognized only by the Moscow Patriarchate as autocephalous. The reason it is not called American Orthodox Church is because it is still in her infancy and undergoing growing pains. Many of her clergy are converts from Protestant assemblies and some of her theology is sometimes too "Protestant." But they are making great strides in developing the Orthodox phronema.
There will never be a single jutrisdcition in North America. But, we Orthodox are not limited to going only to our own particular churches. Many Orthodox pick an Orthodox church of their choice, rather than the Church they were baptized in.
Do a little study yourself. I am not wrong.
I should stop posting because of your ignorance of history?
LOL
And that would be incorrect. What Protestants believe is that ANY man can understand the gift and promise that God gives us with just study of the Bible. NO ONE or any group - even the combined intelligence of EVERYONE who has ever lived - can comprehend the true and infinite nature of God. But the promise He offers is simple, clear, and direct.
You do not need another book, or another person, to understand the very simple promise: trust in the Lord with all your heart, soul, and mind, accept him as your Savior and you will be saved.
That is the foundation of Protestantism. We do not need a church to save us; only Jesus can do that. The church will make you a stronger Christian, but it will NOT make you a Christian. Only Jesus can do that.
We are called to community to spread the Word and to encourage and support each other in our personal relationships with God. That is the point of Acts - that believers living in community will show the love of God, and will support each other. Not that you have to be a member of the community to become a Christian.
No because of yours on display.
I’m not the one who posted the ahistorical (that means false) garbage in 513.
Each called for a Crusade (the second, in general, the third, and the fifth crusade). Each was a Papal bull - a decree from the Pope.
To deny that Popes called for some of the Crusades is, in fact, to deny the history of the Catholic Church and deny the authority of the Pope (both personhood and position) who issued those same bulls.
I’m quite glad those Popes called the Crusades.
Where is the indication they FUNDED them?
when he [Pope Innocent III] learned about their agreement with the Venetians, he withdrew his support of the Crusade, along with his funding.
Or how about the Albigensian crusade? Here we find the Pope resorting to bribes - offering to support confiscation of the land of slain Cathars, rather than letting them revert to their families or lords.
Look, I do not hold these against the Papacy or the Catholic Church. The Church was the strongest political force in medieval times, and the forces of Islam and Catharism had to be repelled. But to deny history is to deny the truth. To deny facts - that the Popes called for, and either directly or indirectly (with cash for ships and supplies or promises of ill-gotten spoils of war) paid for some of the crusades - is simply not tenable.
Only by fully understanding the frailty of ourselves, those who came before us, and the institutions we exist within can we fully appreciate the miracle that is the infallible and inerrant word of God!
As is calling my religion a "scandalous sect"
No, I just believe that others as well as the CAtholic Church have erred at certain times in their history.
If you don’t mind, what church DO you attend?
If you read earlier in the thread, I am a Presbyterian who married a Catholic, and I attend with her at her church (past 26 years). The Priest gave a sermon explaining how the Reformation was wrong, and those religions were not true religions of christ. His real sticking point was calling Protestants a Scandalous Sect.
That’s your source? An undergrad course at Utah State University?
The knights of the crusades were landed gentry, wealthy noblemen who could afford the armor and horses and so forth. They paid their own way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.