Busting the Protestant Myths

[Orthodoxy]

Does this mean I will see you Saturday night at 600 pm at your local orthodox Church?

You are quite welcome in the Orthodox Church and I am sure there will be someone to help you that is much nicer than I.

No, you clearly misunderstood me. I respect the Eastern Orthodox Church but I disagree with it too much. My heart and my beliefs are more rooted in the Southern Baptists church. I do not at all think the Southern Baptists church is perfect but my beliefs are much closer to its beliefs. I at least agree with the essential doctrine of the Orthodox Church but other issues and doctrines I disagree with, for instance the hierarchy the church.

Actually the Southern Baptist Convention puts it well, in their “Faith and Message†what I believe (even though I have my misgivings and problems with the Convention):

http://www.sbc.net/bfm/bfm2000.asp#i

Your loss.

The SB have a statement of faith but the Authentic Church that is 2000 years old cannot. An interesting hypocritical stance.

Do tell what "other issues and doctrines I disagree with" that you would place a 400 year old Church over the original?

What did Jesus say about people that disagree with the Church? Matthew 18. Sola Scriptura rules the day.

Orthodoxy

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Do tell what "other issues and doctrines I disagree with" that you would place a 400 year old Church over the original?

Its complicated and I doubt you really care. Oh and I really don’t see something as valid just because it has been around for 400 years.

What did Jesus say about people that disagree with the Church? Matthew 18. Sola Scriptura rules the day.

Well, I am sure he was not talking about the Eastern Orthodox Church. The “church†is a body of believers and not a denomination necessarily.

One more thing, I see that you do in fact have a big problem with all Protestants actually, perhaps my original assumptions were correct. On that note I say goody bye for now. You seem overly occupied with denominations and "being right," more so then glorifying God.

 

[cj]

cj,....... The Church is not divided and does not define itself as such and is not manifest on the earth as such.

So, I take it that you believe that when you sin you're still an expression of the Head?

Good luck with that one when you stand before the Judge.



But lightheartedness aside, Orthodoxy try and take a little more care when reading the posts of others, and perhaps you will better grasp what is being said.

No kingdom stands divided. Thus it is yout preception of the Kingdom that seems to be the problem. Not the Kingdoms fault that you precieve it as such.

You really, really need to read the posts of others more carefully.

Nothing that I said would suggest that I think that the kingdom of God is divided.

See, I know that the kingdom of God is God Himself expressed. And God is not divided.

But God has a desire, which is to see Himself expressed through believing humanity. But according to His wisdom, God has for a time left believers with the old Adam, and and the process of transformation and conformation is worked out in us, there are times when believers revert to our old fallen ways. And doing so is an expression of being divided from God, and thus a manifestation of the church in division.

The church is not God, but is God expressed/seen in a gathering of men.

1 Corinthians 1:13, Is Christ divided?

You appear to say Yes to this specific question.

Again, I never said anything about Christ being divided. And though Christ alone is the content and essence of the church, men are the vessels that hold this unique Content/Essence, and thus, when these vessels become seperated from the Head/Content/Essence in their outward expression, the expression appears as division.

If you can't understand what I'm saying then I really can't help you any further in this matter.

The Church under the guidance of Jesus Prayer in John 17 says No we are not divided. If you ever bothered to grace the doors of an orthodox Church, study the historical faith maybe your perception of the Body of Christ would change.

You have no cle as to the reality/truth that is to be foud in John 17, for if you did you would be more clear concerning the corruption that you call the Orthodox church.

Truth is, you have no clue what the body of Christ really is.

We can only hope.

Orthodoxy

No, we can also receive.


In love,
cj

 

[Orthodoxy]

cj,

You are an imbecile. Get off my thread please.

Orthodoxy

 

[cj]

Fair enough, in light of that I shall define what I mean when I say “respect.â€Â

"Respect is the objective, unbiased consideration and regard for the rights, values, beliefs and property of all people."

And if we were all perfect the above would be a wonderful reality.

But,....... we're not perfect, and thus objective, unbiased, regard, rights, values, beliefs, and property and all subject to our personal take on things.

And yes, we can go on and on with this, all the way to where we will finally (hopefully) come to see that only Jesus is the way.

Our "respect" towards something is only as valid as the measure of Christ that we have within our being. Anything other is just vain self-effort. And until we come to see this clearly divisions will continue.

Sure we might be able to express some amount of seeming respect towards others, but this is only until we reach our personal end.

So basically I try as much as possible to "consider" the values and beliefs of other denominations.

Yet, this is not what scripture tells us to do.

What scripture says is not to take our eyes off Jesus, and as we do this all of our living and being will be righteous before God.

Because you show "respect" for something or someone does not mean that you are righteous before God concerning it. Which should come first?

Perhaps I could have ended my statement differently. What I meant by my statement is that I do not focus so much on what denomination some is that I get the, what I believe, is irrational assumption that just because someone adheres to another set of beliefs (of a denomination that is different from mine) that makes them necessarily wrong or lost (unsaved). It is possible to respect something but not agree with it…that is what I try and pray to do.

In a human sense maybe, but God has no respect for what He does not agree with, and the new life that we have within us now, and should desire to live by, is divine life, God's life.

Perhaps God's way is longsuffering rather than respect.

Tell me, how long have you suffered your own weaknesses, those that you know about and do not agree with?


By "Does a divided expression not matter to you?", what I am asking is does that which matters to God not matter to you?

And perhaps you can ask yourself this, does the institution of denominating support oneness or divisiveness?

In love,
cj

 

[cj]

cj,

You are an imbecile. Get off my thread please.

Orthodoxy

Well, you have the right to your opinion, but I would think that imbecile-like traits are found more in one who runs around public-forum boards screaming at everyone to "Get off my thread please."

In love,
cj

 

[Relic]

cj,

You are an imbecile. Get off my thread please.

Orthodoxy

Well, you have the right to your opinion, but I would think that imbecile-like traits are found more in one who runs around public-forum boards screaming at everyone to "Get off my thread please."

In love,
cj

:smt044
You guys are hillarious!

:smt064

Thank God truth speaks for itself!

.

 

[Orthodoxy]

cj,

You are an imbecile. Get off my thread please.

Orthodoxy

Well, you have the right to your opinion, but I would think that imbecile-like traits are found more in one who runs around public-forum boards screaming at everyone to "Get off my thread please."

In love,
cj

:smt044
You guys are hillarious!

:smt064

Thank God truth speaks for itself!

.

What is truth? Who defines "truth"?

Do you have anything to contribute to the thread topic or are you another distracting little child?

This place reminds me of my sons 4th grade class where there were always three to four ADD children that disrupted the class and got others in trouble when they attempt to tell them to shut up.

Orthodoxy

 

[guibox]

I perceive that you are a more profound thinker than that crude synopsis would suggest. So what gives?...Here's why quips and sound bites- which are quite beneath you, from what I have seen- won't work here: What reasoning were you using when you stated below that you see some things needing reform in the Orthodox Church?

What? Am I being cheeky? This is the gist of what Orthodoxy was saying and has confirmed. I'm just clarifying the OC take on how they are different from Roman Catholicism.

May I make a suggestion?

I think it would be beneficial for all if you and Orthodoxy (though judging from Orthodoxy's increasingly hostile and rude tone, I'd sooner just see it from you) create a thread explaining the tenets of the Orthodox faith and how you differ in theology and structure from the RC. This would not only give us insight into your faith, but stop the 'lumping in' many are doing with the OC and the RC.

Just a thought.

I disagree. I do agree that there is error and truth in all persons, this does not mean that there is error and truth in the Church.

Sure there is, which is why I couldn't join the OC church (or that it would accept me) anymore than I would another Protestant organization.

* Sunday sacredness (though it sounds like your church does recognize the Sabbath as it is as well)
* State of the dead (immortal souls)
* Eternal torment

..are doctrines that I find no biblical support for and cannot compromise on them, be ye a Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist or whatever church. I cannot, nor will not, accept a doctrine simply on majority support of church fathers or priestly or papal interpretation. Unless your church encourages a 'smorgasbord' method of believing in doctrine, it wouldn't work out.

 

[Orthodoxy]

I perceive that you are a more profound thinker than that crude synopsis would suggest. So what gives?...Here's why quips and sound bites- which are quite beneath you, from what I have seen- won't work here: What reasoning were you using when you stated below that you see some things needing reform in the Orthodox Church?

What? Am I being cheeky? This is the gist of what Orthodoxy was saying and has confirmed. I'm just clarifying the OC take on how they are different from Roman Catholicism.

May I make a suggestion?

I think it would be beneficial for all if you and Orthodoxy (though judging from Orthodoxy's increasingly hostile and rude tone, I'd sooner just see it from you) create a thread explaining the tenets of the Orthodox faith and how you differ in theology and structure from the RC. This would not only give us insight into your faith, but stop the 'lumping in' many are doing with the OC and the RC.

Just a thought.

http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.or ... sm.htm?o=0[/url]

Eternal Torment from the Orthodox beliefs:

http://www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire.htm

When you are done reading these let me know then maybe we can discuss the difference from a logical, reasoned and informed position.

Maybe.....

Orthodoxy

 

[JM]

This is the silly op I've yet to read!

jason
PS: Baptist are not prots.

 

[Relic]

:smt044
You guys are hilarious!

:smt064

Thank God truth speaks for itself!

.

What is truth? Who defines "truth"?

Do you have anything to contribute to the thread topic or are you another distracting little child?

This place reminds me of my sons 4th grade class where there were always three to four ADD children that disrupted the class and got others in trouble when they attempt to tell them to shut up.

Orthodoxy

Disrupting? Hardly!

And the attitude you take on in that reply reminds me of those stick in the mud teachers, that would be so quick to slap the hand of their students with a ruler! Yeah, as if what you have to say is of any real value to those who find your post of no use to them. Even though, anyone is allowed to laugh if they so choose!

This is a WEB FORUM, a place on the web where the there are no rules that indicate we are not allowed to laugh or point out humor, or participate in a thread because the one who created it says stay out of it if you don't' have anything to contribute to it. NOR DID I GO OFF TOPIC!

I contributed a laugh at the ridiculousness of the bickering that you are doing because cj joined in on the discussion on this thread! And if you don't like it then I suggest you take your comments to the mods to tell them you refuse to allow anyone disrupting "your" thread or to laugh at anything that is going on or to laugh at anything that was written in "YOUR" thread, and see how far you that would get you!


:-? What is your problem? Did I commmit some kind of a horrible sin by laughing at the childishness of your bickering and refuting people who make contributions to this thread. I can understand if they go off topic and you suggest they create another thread for that subject, but for you to get upset because of what you deem as an unworthy contribution to the thread is childishness that is coming from you! Sheesch! Did I advocate some kind of a sin or something? I don't think so! :o

:-?

.

 

[Orthodoxy]

This is the silly op I've yet to read!

jason
PS: Baptist are not prots.

Thats right the baptists are followers of John the Baptist. How silly of me.

However historical facts show the Baptist Church was begun in 1609by John Wesley I believe the time line states.

Nice try.

Orthodoxy

 

[thessalonian]

[quote="guibox]
* Sunday sacredness (though it sounds like your church does recognize the Sabbath as it is as well)
* State of the dead (immortal souls)
* Eternal torment

..are doctrines that I find no biblical support for and cannot compromise on them, be ye a Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist or whatever church. I cannot, nor will not, accept a doctrine simply on majority support of church fathers or priestly or papal interpretation. Unless your church encourages a 'smorgasbord' method of believing in doctrine, it wouldn't work out.[/quote]

You sound like a universalist. No, the smorgaboard approach would not be a Catholic one. I believe prov 3:5 talks about mavericks like you. It says "trust not in your own understanding".

Blessings

 

[Gary]

However historical facts show the Baptist Church was begun in 1609 by John Wesley....

:roll:

http://www.baptisthistory.org/baptistbeginnings.htm

.

 

[guibox]

You sound like a universalist. No, the smorgaboard approach would not be a Catholic one. I believe prov 3:5 talks about mavericks like you. It says "trust not in your own understanding".

I am neither a Universalist, nor a maverick. I believe the scripture can interpret itself. It is the 'leaning on their own understanding, maverick' who looks at verses like 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:21 and concludes that man immortal soul goes to heaven at death. It is the 'maverick interpreter' who looks at texts like Luke 16:31-39 and uses it to form their belief on the afterlife. It is the maverick who looks at texts like Romans 14:1-5 and Colossians 2:14 and concludes that the Sabbath is not applicable to Christians, nor was it an issue for the apostlic church.

No my friend, these errors and heresies are here today BECAUSE people were mavericks and thought they could take a cursory intepretation the bible based on pre-existing beliefs read into the interpretation, without using it as a cross reference to itself, or worse, blatantly ignoring the contradictions in the scriptures to their theories.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

However historical facts show the Baptist Church was begun in 1609 by John Wesley....

:roll:

http://www.baptisthistory.org/baptistbeginnings.htm

.

That site has an accurate historical rendering, as opposed to Landmarkists, whom they reference in the intro to beginnings...

Sarcasm aside, the Wesley confusion is easy to understand, since the brothers Charles and John and their Methodist brethren also sprang from the Church of England, though roughly one hundred years after John Smyth left his post as Anglican priest and initiated his work in Holland.

Not everyone who studies Christian history is well versed in the history of Protestantism, just as few Protestants know much about what happened prior to Wycliffe/Tyndale/Foxe/Calvin/Luther. I recommend Wiliston Walker "A History of the Christian Church" or Philip Schaff's "History of the Christian Church."

Both do an acceptable job of summarizing 20 centuries and 6 continents of Christian history.

Thanks to Gary, always quick to Google and catch a mistake.

 

[Gary]

... actually, MOST Christians know that John Wesley was the founder of the Methodist Church. No need to Google-search for that. Or look in any simple Church history book or "who's who" in Christian history. I can recommend a few books to you.

Ever been to a Methodist church service ex-Pastor?

.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

... actually, MOST Christians know that John Wesley was the founder of the Methodist Church. No need to Google-search for that. Or look in any simple Church history book or "who's who" in Christian history. I can recommend a few books to you.

Ever been to a Methodist church service ex-Pastor?

.

Yes I have, pumpkin.

Ever pick your feet in Poughkeepsie?

 

[thessalonian]

You sound like a universalist. No, the smorgaboard approach would not be a Catholic one. I believe prov 3:5 talks about mavericks like you. It says "trust not in your own understanding".

I am neither a Universalist, nor a maverick. I believe the scripture can interpret itself. It is the 'leaning on their own understanding, maverick' who looks at verses like 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:21 and concludes that man immortal soul goes to heaven at death. It is the 'maverick interpreter' who looks at texts like Luke 16:31-39 and uses it to form their belief on the afterlife. It is the maverick who looks at texts like Romans 14:1-5 and Colossians 2:14 and concludes that the Sabbath is not applicable to Christians, nor was it an issue for the apostlic church.

No my friend, these errors and heresies are here today BECAUSE people were mavericks and thought they could take a cursory intepretation the bible based on pre-existing beliefs read into the interpretation, without using it as a cross reference to itself, or worse, blatantly ignoring the contradictions in the scriptures to their theories.

Ah another infallible interpreter with THE method of interpruting scripture that ensures you get it right. You and Mr. Solo are really going to have to get together and iron out your differences. He's says get the Holy Spirit on your side. You say, just put two bibles side by side and you've got it. Of course you could include Heidi in as well. She says, take about 25 years off your life if your thirty five and you'll have no problem. Then there's people like Klee Shey (haven't seen her around much lately) who say well everybody's got the truth, it just comes out different for each person and stovebolts who holds the theory, well we really don't know who is right for sure. I tell ya, you Protestants really need to come together and agree about something besides Catholicism being wrong. Hey, I've got a solution for ya.
:wink:
:wink: Blessings