|
Post by clusium on Mar 15, 2023 17:06:00 GMT
And still deny. They are not anywhere as different as let's say, the JWs, Pentecostals, Mormons, SDAs, Christian Science, Baptist, etc. The Orthodox believe in Apostolic Succession, just as Catholicism does. The Orthodox venerate the Blessed Virgin Mary, in the same way that Catholicism does (Anglicanism, & maybe Lutheranism are the only Protestant churches to venerate Mary). The Orthodox have 7 Sacraments, just as Catholicism does (the vast majority of Protestants, with the noted exceptions of the 2 afore-mentioned ones, have only 2 sacraments). The Orthodox only ordain men as priests, just as Catholicism does. The Orthodox have monks & nuns, just as Catholicism does. The surface similarities do not, once again, obviate very real doctrinal differences, a number of which originate in differing interpretations of scripture. And, once again, this is not even touching on the other sects of Catholicism (the non-Latin), in which the differences are likely even greater. But RC's will go to great lengths to deny the schisms in their 'one true' variety of Christian dogma, the better to emphasize the, to them, heretical sectarianisms of the Protestant branches. But to the onlooker, it becomes obvious that there is no 'one true', fully in accord with every precept of dogma that the Roman Catholic Church erroneously insists itself to be the sole earthly exponent of. (and, as much as the author of the article cited here- www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/are-there-sects-in-the-catholic-church-1350-attempts to torture words to evade facts, there are indeed sects within the RCC itself, as any observer of the RCC is quite aware.) Well, I still do not place the differences between Catholicism & Orthodoxy to be on par with the differences between Catholicism & Protestantism, especially those Protestant sects that were formed no less than 2 centuries ago.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 15, 2023 17:07:29 GMT
The surface similarities do not, once again, obviate very real doctrinal differences, a number of which originate in differing interpretations of scripture. And, once again, this is not even touching on the other sects of Catholicism (the non-Latin), in which the differences are likely even greater. But RC's will go to great lengths to deny the schisms in their 'one true' variety of Christian dogma, the better to emphasize the, to them, heretical sectarianisms of the Protestant branches. But to the onlooker, it becomes obvious that there is no 'one true', fully in accord with every precept of dogma that the Roman Catholic Church erroneously insists itself to be the sole earthly exponent of. (and, as much as the author of the article cited here- www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/are-there-sects-in-the-catholic-church-1350-attempts to torture words to evade facts, there are indeed sects within the RCC itself, as any observer of the RCC is quite aware.) Well, I still do not place the differences between Catholicism & Orthodoxy to be on par with the differences between Catholicism & Protestantism, especially those Protestant sects that were formed no less than 2 centuries ago. The differences are in degree only, not in kind. And recall that you had initially denied there were any differences within the Catholic tradition whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 15, 2023 19:18:08 GMT
Well, I still do not place the differences between Catholicism & Orthodoxy to be on par with the differences between Catholicism & Protestantism, especially those Protestant sects that were formed no less than 2 centuries ago. The differences are in degree only, not in kind. And recall that you had initially denied there were any differences within the Catholic tradition whatsoever. I was referring to doctrine & practice, which are essentially the same. If Catholicism & Orthodoxy were completely identical, then there would have been no schism to begin with. In all denominations of Christianity, Christ Is the First & Foremost Authority. Where the core difference between Protestantism & Catholicism (right along with Orthodoxy) is, with Protestantism, the second authority is the Holy Bible. The third is (or rather ARE) the authority of the particular churches. For Catholicism & Orthodoxy, it goes the other way: The second Authority is the Church, & the Holy Bible is the third Authority.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,677
Likes: 1,303
|
Post by The Lost One on Mar 15, 2023 21:50:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Mar 15, 2023 22:14:04 GMT
That has nothing to do with your slanderous claim. Classic avoidance and diversion. Maybe the question should be rephrased. Is the Biblical account of creation science or scientific? Does it corroborate with science? Does it employ the scientific method? Are creation scientists scientific and part of the scientific tradition? Look up the word "opposed.""
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 15, 2023 23:28:49 GMT
The differences are in degree only, not in kind. And recall that you had initially denied there were any differences within the Catholic tradition whatsoever. I was referring to doctrine & practice, which are essentially the same. If Catholicism & Orthodoxy were completely identical, then there would have been no schism to begin with. In all denominations of Christianity, Christ Is the First & Foremost Authority. Where the core difference between Protestantism & Catholicism (right along with Orthodoxy) is, with Protestantism, the second authority is the Holy Bible. The third is (or rather ARE) the authority of the particular churches. For Catholicism & Orthodoxy, it goes the other way: The second Authority is the Church, & the Holy Bible is the third Authority. However, there are still schisms in The One True Church.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 15, 2023 23:53:22 GMT
I was referring to doctrine & practice, which are essentially the same. If Catholicism & Orthodoxy were completely identical, then there would have been no schism to begin with. In all denominations of Christianity, Christ Is the First & Foremost Authority. Where the core difference between Protestantism & Catholicism (right along with Orthodoxy) is, with Protestantism, the second authority is the Holy Bible. The third is (or rather ARE) the authority of the particular churches. For Catholicism & Orthodoxy, it goes the other way: The second Authority is the Church, & the Holy Bible is the third Authority. However, there are still schisms in The One True Church. Just as there are in all religions (the divisions within Christianity must receive the most emphasis, when it comes to discussing world religions).
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Mar 16, 2023 0:44:59 GMT
Most, including myself, have given credit to Paul because he's so important in the New Testament but that doesn't necessarily mean he was important in his lifetime. It could be there were far more influential people but their texts didn't survive or nothing was written by them or about them. We really don't know the answer. An interesting point about Paul and the Apostles is that none of them were Christians based on faith, Jesus demonstrated his power to convert them and yet we are told today that we must believe in Christ sans evidence.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowSouL: Padawan of Yoda on Mar 16, 2023 2:35:58 GMT
I've always been told Christianity is just one generation from dying out and disappearing. So its survival depends on each person who wants it to continue. I don't think it's true, but I want it to continue because I fear that without it, the religious types throughout the US would have no moral compass. I have a fine moral compass and it works just great, but from what I hear from many Christians if there wasn't a god 'holding their feet to the fire' so to speak, no tellin' what kind of havoc they'd reek....or is it they'd reek of havoc? Or they'd wreck them some havoc...something like that. Fear of life and death makes many crazy. They can't get a grip without something else to hang onto. Their own personal empowerment isn't enough. It's one thing to need something else to hang on to. It's entirely another to say that everyone else must hang on to that same something else, or else.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Mar 16, 2023 21:52:57 GMT
Try being hermetic (although to be fair most hermeticism is VERY Christian)
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 16, 2023 23:00:45 GMT
Fear of life and death makes many crazy. They can't get a grip without something else to hang onto. Their own personal empowerment isn't enough. It's one thing to need something else to hang on to. It's entirely another to say that everyone else must hang on to that same something else, or else. Demanding others accept one’s belief system is to assuage one’s own doubts.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Mar 17, 2023 0:55:28 GMT
The differences are in degree only, not in kind. And recall that you had initially denied there were any differences within the Catholic tradition whatsoever. I was referring to doctrine & practice, which are essentially the same. If Catholicism & Orthodoxy were completely identical, then there would have been no schism to begin with. In all denominations of Christianity, Christ Is the First & Foremost Authority. Where the core difference between Protestantism & Catholicism (right along with Orthodoxy) is, with Protestantism, the second authority is the Holy Bible. The third is (or rather ARE) the authority of the particular churches. For Catholicism & Orthodoxy, it goes the other way: The second Authority is the Church, & the Holy Bible is the third Authority. You know, unless a pope contradicts him.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Mar 17, 2023 1:18:15 GMT
I was referring to doctrine & practice, which are essentially the same. If Catholicism & Orthodoxy were completely identical, then there would have been no schism to begin with. In all denominations of Christianity, Christ Is the First & Foremost Authority. Where the core difference between Protestantism & Catholicism (right along with Orthodoxy) is, with Protestantism, the second authority is the Holy Bible. The third is (or rather ARE) the authority of the particular churches. For Catholicism & Orthodoxy, it goes the other way: The second Authority is the Church, & the Holy Bible is the third Authority. However, there are still schisms in The One True Church. I know you are not, but anyone who uses this phrase about any church is more telling us how insecure they are rather than talking about the benefit of any religion.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 17, 2023 2:21:09 GMT
I was referring to doctrine & practice, which are essentially the same. If Catholicism & Orthodoxy were completely identical, then there would have been no schism to begin with. In all denominations of Christianity, Christ Is the First & Foremost Authority. Where the core difference between Protestantism & Catholicism (right along with Orthodoxy) is, with Protestantism, the second authority is the Holy Bible. The third is (or rather ARE) the authority of the particular churches. For Catholicism & Orthodoxy, it goes the other way: The second Authority is the Church, & the Holy Bible is the third Authority. You know, unless a pope contradicts him. The Pope would never contradict Christ.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Mar 17, 2023 2:52:00 GMT
Sweet sweet atheist bait.
|
|
|
Post by Geddy on Mar 17, 2023 3:14:21 GMT
You know, unless a pope contradicts him. The Pope would never contradict Christ. If he did, he wouldn't be pope for long...
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 17, 2023 4:07:38 GMT
I would say that there are 3 people responsible for it, Jesus is not one of them Paul for spreading Christianity Okay, I already shot this down earlier, but people kept whining. Actually, Paul himself shot this down earlier. There's no possible way he was responsible for the spread of Christianity. It's impossibe. He's the one who told people to welcome the persecution even unto death. He preached this. He had anyone embracing the belief in Christ dying for it. And the Roman empire obliged them. When you read that an emperor was "kinder" towards Christians than other emperors, it only means that particular emperor didn't send people out to search for Christians to kill. In Nature, it's impossible to keep alive when you're dead. Christians were being wiped out, and there were plenty of incentives for people to turn Christians in to authorities. Read the letters of Paul himself. Christianity survived DESPITE Paul, and anyone who says it survived because of Paul is either lying or totally ignorant of History. Only a supernatural principality (probably the Holy Ghost) could possibly have kept it going. I've got news for you. If you start a religion and have a thousand followers, and all thousand of you jump off a 1000 foot cliff into jagged rocks, that religion dies unless you have some supernatural force to keep it going.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowSouL: Padawan of Yoda on Mar 17, 2023 4:26:16 GMT
I would say that there are 3 people responsible for it, Jesus is not one of them Paul for spreading Christianity Okay, I already shot this down earlier, but people kept whining. Actually, Paul himself shot this down earlier. There's no possible way he was responsible for the spread of Christianity. It's impossibe. He's the one who told people to welcome the persecution even unto death. He preached this. He had anyone embracing the belief in Christ dying for it. And the Roman empire obliged them. When you read that an emperor was "kinder" towards Christians than other emperors, it only means that particular emperor didn't send people out to search for Christians to kill. In Nature, it's impossible to keep alive when you're dead. Christians were being wiped out, and there were plenty of incentives for people to turn Christians in to authorities. Read the letters of Paul himself. Christianity survived DESPITE Paul, and anyone who says it survived because of Paul is either lying or totally ignorant of History. Only a supernatural principality (probably the Holy Ghost) could possibly have kept it going. I've got news for you. If you start a religion and have a thousand followers, and all thousand of you jump off a 1000 foot cliff into jagged rocks, that religion dies unless you have some supernatural force to keep it going. So you're saying Paul's intention was for all Christians to become martyrs, and you're saying that all of the first Christians were martyred?
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Mar 17, 2023 9:44:11 GMT
I would say that there are 3 people responsible for it, Jesus is not one of them Paul for spreading Christianity Okay, I already shot this down earlier, but people kept whining. Actually, Paul himself shot this down earlier. There's no possible way he was responsible for the spread of Christianity. It's impossibe. He's the one who told people to welcome the persecution even unto death. He preached this. He had anyone embracing the belief in Christ dying for it. And the Roman empire obliged them. When you read that an emperor was "kinder" towards Christians than other emperors, it only means that particular emperor didn't send people out to search for Christians to kill. In Nature, it's impossible to keep alive when you're dead. Christians were being wiped out, and there were plenty of incentives for people to turn Christians in to authorities. Read the letters of Paul himself. Christianity survived DESPITE Paul, and anyone who says it survived because of Paul is either lying or totally ignorant of History. Only a supernatural principality (probably the Holy Ghost) could possibly have kept it going. I've got news for you. If you start a religion and have a thousand followers, and all thousand of you jump off a 1000 foot cliff into jagged rocks, that religion dies unless you have some supernatural force to keep it going. Seems like the only person who is whining here is you. Because people have an opinion you disagree with. But please go on and whine like a baby, because people don`t agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 17, 2023 13:14:16 GMT
However, there are still schisms in The One True Church. Just as there are in all religions (the divisions within Christianity must receive the most emphasis, when it comes to discussing world religions). No one has denied this. Not to belabor it, but you are the one who initially denied any type of schism within Catholicism, which is certainly readily shown as otherwise. And only in the Western tradition does Christianity need receive first emphasis in this context. In the rest of the world, where Christianity plays a considerably minuter part, it's a tempest in a teacup which the overwhelming majority of the rest of humanity could not care less about.
|
|