I am an Orthodox Christian and Historian; Almost Everything Most Know About The Church is False

page: 10
43
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 


Are you serious? You sound like the people who were paid to write dumb stuff purely to infect more minds with the outdated garbage of Big Brother...

And now it's outdated garbage of the Church. Maybe if the Church wasn't holding us back, we'd be somewhere by now. Christianity has played its part. We have survived to see 2012. It's time to step back and let us spread our wings. We don't need fairy tales to keep us safe anymore.




posted on May, 6 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by TruthSeekerMike
 


Christ Consciousness is nowhere near as big a laughingstock as believing that a man who has been dead for two thousand years will fall from the sky and reverse everything gone wrong in one day.

edit on CSundaypm525212f12America/Chicago06 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)


I fully agree. We call it "Theosis". We believe Christ is coming back as promised after he was resurrected from the dead and ascended to Heaven but don't dwell on it or try to predict when. If you actually looked into Orthodox theology I firmly believe you'd say, "that's what I've been trying to say" very often. The whole premise of this post is history, but I am going to do one on theology and you'll see how warped it has become.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by sacgamer25
 



You see I need no one to teach me because Christ lives in me. This is EXACTLY what scripture says. I don't need any special gift of interpretation to understand the top two verses. What I did need is faith to believe that Christ lives in me and wanted to teach me all things.


Do you mean to say the Christ Consciousness is always within us...we just have to embrace it?

Is this what you mean?


Only if you believe it
but to keep it simple yes.

What better way to follow God but to be instructed by his Son. Many Christians think what I am saying is new age but it is what the bible actually says. I'm not sure how this message has been lost but the real message in the bible is Christ in you. This is what Christ meant when he said he came to perfect the law. If you learn to listen to the Christ consciousness as you put it, then you can be guided to understand how and why you should love everyone as Christ loved everyone. Simply obeying rules cannot teach you how to love your enemy, but listening to Christ can.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


Wow. What you fail to see is the original status of Orthodoxy. If people didn't have those early fathers like Paul (who wrote the epistles you reference to Orthodox Churches) they wouldn't have anything to interpret. You say scripture isn't open to private interpretation but proceed to deliver your own private interpretation. There are 20,000 denominations who firmly believe they are the only ones interpreting scripture correctly but the original church, the authors of the Bible, the 12, the 70, those who were in the room at Pentecost, those baptized that day, the martyrs, and the early councils are wrong?
I'll bet you can't find the notion of sola scriptura in the Bible but it underpins everything you've said.


What did I say actually? Listen to the Holy Spirit because that is what the bible says. The great thing about what I am telling you is what I say relies not on man's logic but on the Holy Spirit. If what I say is true than all you have to do is believe that the Holy Spirit is the teacher. I quoted enough verses from scripture that I think I have made a solid case for the Holy Spirit being the teacher to all men. If you have faith to believe that Christ is within you and the Holy Spirit will teach you than you don't need to believe anything I say, for it is the very spirit within in you that will teach you.

I make no claim to having a private interpretation, I only claim that the Holy Spirit has taught me. Scripture is plain when it says Christ is in you and the Holy Spirit is your teacher. There is much of the bible that is not plain but these messages are written and explained by Paul, Jesus and many of the other New Testament authors. Actually the theme of listening to the Holy Spirit and allowing the Holy Spirit to teach you is firmly ingrained in the Old Testament as well.
edit on 7-5-2012 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


Wow. What you fail to see is the original status of Orthodoxy. If people didn't have those early fathers like Paul (who wrote the epistles you reference to Orthodox Churches) they wouldn't have anything to interpret. You say scripture isn't open to private interpretation but proceed to deliver your own private interpretation. There are 20,000 denominations who firmly believe they are the only ones interpreting scripture correctly but the original church, the authors of the Bible, the 12, the 70, those who were in the room at Pentecost, those baptized that day, the martyrs, and the early councils are wrong?
I'll bet you can't find the notion of sola scriptura in the Bible but it underpins everything you've said.


Are you listening to what I am saying? I am certainly not saying sola scripture. You say follow church traditions on top of scripture. I say listen to the Holy Spirit on top of scripture. The spirit of Christ is alive in you and can teach you in a way that tradition and sola scripture simply cannot do.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


Then why didn't Philip just tell the Ethiopian to pay attention to the Holy Spirit? Why isn't the entire content of every epistle in the New Testament, "Just listen to the Holy Spirit."?



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


I sense you have a very carnal view of Tradition, even to the point of contradiction. You say that we are to live by the Spirit, and that's fine, but you fail to realize that Tradition is the Church living by the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps you are under the impression that Tradition is only a tired collection of dogmas, rules, repetitious prayers and so on but this isn't true:

"Tradition is not a principle striving to restore the past, using the past as a criterion for the present. Such a conception of tradition is rejected by history itself and by the consciousness of the Orthodox Church... Tradition is the constant abiding of the Spirit and not only the memory of words. Tradition is a charismatic, not a historical event" - Fr. Georges Florovsky

My friend, if you live by the Spirit inside of you why would you want to divide yourself against It?



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by monkcaw
 


Ah, but one must also ask why the tradition was developed. For instance, it was once considered tradition to avoid walking under ladders, and to avoid black cats.

If a tradition is created out of an uneducated perspective of life, then not only is it unlikely to be accurate, but it is also limiting the mindset of the community. In this sense, tradition is actually unhealthy.

What you're talking about is tradition of the Church, which was established in order to create a single path that would provide the most safety for humanity. Now that we have bypassed the point of extinction, and learned to survive more effectively, a different set of rules is required.

What works for the baby, does not work for the adolescent, the adult, or the elderly. We have gone from all fours to walking upright, so to speak, and now a different spirituality must be sought. Milk for babes, meat for men. It's time for change.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


Then why didn't Philip just tell the Ethiopian to pay attention to the Holy Spirit? Why isn't the entire content of every epistle in the New Testament, "Just listen to the Holy Spirit."?


I don't know why Jesus spoke in Parables, and why the bible is written the way it is. I will however give you scripture. Remember this scripture is primarily concerning the Pharisees and Sadducees, who by searching scripture and following the traditions of their fathers considered themselves righteous.



Mathew 13 13:15
13 This is why I speak to them in parables:
“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.
14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’


You believe that your church teaches you the correct interpretation and the correct traditions to follow. This is the same error that they made 2000 years ago. Christians have considered themselves righteous; when they should be considering themselves blessed and become an example to the world. There should be no such thing as a wealthy, angry, disobedient, judgmental, self righteous Christian, yet the world is full of them.

If the Pharisees and Sadducees could not be made Holy by following the law and church traditions how can we possibly hope to surpass their righteousness? It is only by the gift of the Holy Spirit that one can become like Christ, for one must share the mind of Christ to become like Christ.

If Christ lives in you and you in him, if you have died and Christ has become your life, if you live by the spirit and not according to the flesh, than why do you still need someone else to teach you? Is not the Spirit of Christ enough? What did the profits do? They searched the spirit, not scripture to obtain the truth. You can continue to go to church to find the truth or you can simply listen to the Holy Spirit that is in you.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


There is one problem with that, friend.

Define "Holy Spirit". Holy Spirit is different to everyone, because of how they look at it. I doubt anyone in the world has an accurate and detailed definition, in any language. This is unfortunate, since the easiest way to find the "Holy Spirit" is to know its exact scientific definition. I'm not saying it's impossible. But the next question one might ask is, how this could be found...

The truthful answer? Science isn't yet being put to the right use, the right direction, to find the definition. The people in charge of today's science are more interested in perfecting the art of killing and deceiving, because those are the projects the government approves grants for. As I have said repeatedly, the ultimate goal of the combined nations of this world...the final destination for our species, as determined by our leaders...is the trillion dollar question.

Now, here's my hopeful answer: we don't know the definition yet...but someday soon, we will.
edit on CMondaypm090920f20America/Chicago07 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by sacgamer25

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


Then why didn't Philip just tell the Ethiopian to pay attention to the Holy Spirit? Why isn't the entire content of every epistle in the New Testament, "Just listen to the Holy Spirit."?


I don't know why Jesus spoke in Parables, and why the bible is written the way it is. I will however give you scripture. Remember this scripture is primarily concerning the Pharisees and Sadducees, who by searching scripture and following the traditions of their fathers considered themselves righteous.

I was referring to Acts 8:26-40 when Philip asks a Eunuch if he understands what he's reading and he replies, "how can I without a teacher?". That's not a parable, Luke wrote about it in Acts because it actually happened. You still don't answer why the Epistles are so detailed about Church affairs. Why does Paul speak of Bishops and Deacons if there is no use for them? Shall we only look at scripture that supports our own conclusions?



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by monkcaw
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


I sense you have a very carnal view of Tradition, even to the point of contradiction. You say that we are to live by the Spirit, and that's fine, but you fail to realize that Tradition is the Church living by the Holy Spirit.

Perhaps you are under the impression that Tradition is only a tired collection of dogmas, rules, repetitious prayers and so on but this isn't true:

"Tradition is not a principle striving to restore the past, using the past as a criterion for the present. Such a conception of tradition is rejected by history itself and by the consciousness of the Orthodox Church... Tradition is the constant abiding of the Spirit and not only the memory of words. Tradition is a charismatic, not a historical event" - Fr. Georges Florovsky

My friend, if you live by the Spirit inside of you why would you want to divide yourself against It?


Why do you quote men on the importance of tradition and not the bible?

Here is what Jesus said about traditions.



Mathew 15:1-9
15 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8 “‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules. ”


Here is what Paul said



Colossians 2:23
Such regulations indeed have an appearance of wisdom, with their self-imposed worship, their false humility and their harsh treatment of the body, but they lack any value in restraining sensual indulgence.


Doesn't sound like they felt church tradition was of much value. But if you're not convinced yet try this verse.



1 Timothy4:1-6 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4 For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
6 If you point these things out to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished on the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed.


I ask you this simple question who is telling you to abstain from certain foods and telling widowed priests not to remarry? Why are they teaching things that scripture says not to teach? I am not asking you to abstain from anything, I am merely asking you to listen to the Holy Spirit. If you do this there is nothing else that I have to tell you, because Christ will answer everything else for you.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


There is one problem with that, friend.

Define "Holy Spirit". Holy Spirit is different to everyone, because of how they look at it. I doubt anyone in the world has an accurate and detailed definition, in any language. This is unfortunate, since the easiest way to find the "Holy Spirit" is to know its exact scientific definition. I'm not saying it's impossible. But the next question one might ask is, how this could be found...

The truthful answer? Science isn't yet being put to the right use, the right direction, to find the definition. The people in charge of today's science are more interested in perfecting the art of killing and deceiving, because those are the projects the government approves grants for. As I have said repeatedly, the ultimate goal of the combined nations of this world...the final destination for our species, as determined by our leaders...is the trillion dollar question.

Now, here's my hopeful answer: we don't know the definition yet...but someday soon, we will.
edit on CMondaypm090920f20America/Chicago07 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)


My personal opinion is the answer can only be found in faith. I don't believe anyone can define the Holy Spirit, outside of what is already written in scripture. One can only know the Holy Spirit if they believe in the scripture. Many Christians think that believing that Christ is the son of God, who came to forgive sins, was crucified and resurrected is what it is meant when the bible says believe in Christ.

All of these things are important and they are the foundation to the Christian faith, but they fall short of truly making the believer like Christ. You must believe that the spirit of Christ is in you and teaching you all things before you can learn to listen. You must do what it says in order to be taught. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of the living God, therefore the Holy Spirit is not found within the pages of a book but within the believer. Believing in the Holy Spirit within is what the bible means by believing in Christ. This is why anyone who does not believe is condemned already.

If you don't believe the Holy Spirit is in you teaching you how to overcome sin, than you will not overcome sin and thus die in your sin as a slave to sin. Life can only be found in the Holy Spirit, and that spirit can only be found and understood by faith. Faith without deeds is dead, which means you must not only believe the Holy Spirit is in you, you must do what it says.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Truth Seeker Mike,

While I do agree that a large portion of Christianity is not based on the actual teachings of Jesus (more like St Paul), but how far back do you have to go to get the real story? Evidence suggests that the gospels in the new testament were written some 30+ years after the death of Jesus by people that were not witnesses to the actions of his life. There may be oral traditions that go back, but how do you determine the accuracy or origin of the stories? We don't even know that the bible stories are the original versions. To me this just sounds like another version of Christianity where person X claims Y and thinks that its the true way that Jesus intended. The truth is, short of time travel, we will probably never know the answer. I see it for what it is, which is one of the first moral guide books that taught empathy (through the character Jesus). A good thing, but misinterpreted by many. I do agree that the focus should be on his teachings. Very interesting topic. I've definitely learned a lot. Thanks for posting.
edit on 7-5-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   


1 Timothy4:1-6 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4 For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
6 If you point these things out to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished on the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed.


I ask you this simple question who is telling you to abstain from certain foods and telling widowed priests not to remarry? Why are they teaching things that scripture says not to teach? I am not asking you to abstain from anything, I am merely asking you to listen to the Holy Spirit. If you do this there is nothing else that I have to tell you, because Christ will answer everything else for you.




You do realize that Paul was writing to Timothy who was a Priest and later a Bishop right? The same Paul who wrote "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." and "the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." That last quote is from the same book you quote but an earlier chapter. In fact, there's an awful lot of very Church-specific things in Timothy. The verses you chose exemplify the need for unchanging tradition. It's not about rules or foods, it's about keeping the fullness of the truth of the Gospel alive untarnished.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthSeekerMike
 


I would ask you the same thing I asked sacgamer. Define "Holy Spirit"...using words that do not come from the Bible. Tell me, in your own words, the universal definition of the Holy Spirit. A definition that does not come from the Bible.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs
Truth Seeker Mike,

While I do agree that a large portion of Christianity is not based on the actual teachings of Jesus (more like St Paul), but how far back do you have to go to get the real story? Evidence suggests that the gospels in the new testament were written some 30+ years after the death of Jesus by people that were not witnesses to the actions of his life. There may be oral traditions that go back, but how do you determine the accuracy or origin of the stories? We don't even know that the bible stories are the original versions. To me this just sounds like another version of Christianity where person X claims Y and thinks that its the true way that Jesus intended. The truth is, short of time travel, we will probably never know the answer. I see it for what it is, which is one of the first moral guide books that taught empathy (through the character Jesus). A good thing, but misinterpreted by many. I do agree that the focus should be on his teachings. Very interesting topic. I've definitely learned a lot. Thanks for posting.
edit on 7-5-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)


You just have to look into the history of the Church. I've tried to stay clear of theology in this post to the best of my ability because it is a historical matter at its root. I think many people assume the Bible just fell out of the sky one day years after Christ walked the Earth, but it didn't happen that way at all. If you read Acts, it actually tells the story of the creation of the first Churches and there has been an unbroken, documented, consistent practice ever since. People have left the Church and still taught in the name of Christ, but only one body of believers has ever been the original that received the traditions by word and epistle.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthSeekerMike
 


History of the Church means nothing. All it takes is a word and the exchange of gold (or whatever currency or favor happens to be convenient) and an entire section is rewritten according to satisfaction.

Really, I would really on historical documents coming from discredited people. After all, if they've been discredited, it's for a reason, right? But make sure to check the sources anyway.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike



1 Timothy4:1-6 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4 For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
6 If you point these things out to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished on the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed.


I ask you this simple question who is telling you to abstain from certain foods and telling widowed priests not to remarry? Why are they teaching things that scripture says not to teach? I am not asking you to abstain from anything, I am merely asking you to listen to the Holy Spirit. If you do this there is nothing else that I have to tell you, because Christ will answer everything else for you.






You do realize that Paul was writing to Timothy who was a Priest and later a Bishop right? The same Paul who wrote "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." and "the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." That last quote is from the same book you quote but an earlier chapter. In fact, there's an awful lot of very Church-specific things in Timothy. The verses you chose exemplify the need for unchanging tradition. It's not about rules or foods, it's about keeping the fullness of the truth of the Gospel alive untarnished.


Timothy was a bishop according to who? You do realize the bible only speaks of three different roles in the church.

The apostle, who is someone who travels around spreading the good news, most closely related to missionary. The apostles all worked with their hands to provide an income when they traveled. Paul actually considered it robbery when he had to take money from the church for his travels.

The Overseer, who is someone who is responsible for the church meeting, probably settling disputes in the church. This was the head office in the church with only the Apostles having more authority. Interestingly enough the apostles and the Overseers worked for a living and it was actually required that the Overseer be someone who worked and could take care of his own family. There is never mention of a priest who stands at a pulpit and earns his living from talking to the congregation each week. This would be church tradition but not biblical.

Finally there is the Deacon whose wife was a Deaconess. Their primary role was to cook and serve dinner the Lord's Supper, most closely related to usher. After all it was the Lord's Supper eaten at church not the Eucharist, at least in the bible. Sharing the Lord's Supper at church is biblical, the Eucharist is church tradition.

So your church tells you that Timothy was a Bishop, even the role of Bishop, as it the church currently recognizes it, is not found anywhere in the bible. Both Paul and Timothy gave credit to Christ as the teacher, but you think that the church holds the keys to understanding. Paul says repeatedly that it is not he but the Holy Spirit at work in him that is providing the inspiration for his letters.

Do you think only Priests and Bishops hear from the Holy Spirit?
edit on 7-5-2012 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I'm going to wait patiently until someone answers my question regarding "Holy Spirit". Until someone does so, the phrase remains as meaningful as selling your car for gas money.





top topics
 
43
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join