There are 10s of thousands of sects, churches and denominations in Christianity. But when Jesus walked on earth he established only one church, which is it?
I have been committed to Catholicism but recently I read St Photius' treatise on orthodox triadology, The Mystery of the Trinity, which has made me question whether the Catholics were right about the filioque.
JEEEEEEEBUSS LAWD SABE ME!!!!
The holy name of Jesus is not a meme or a joke.Religion is a joke. Unfortunately, a sick one.
Religion is a scapegoat. People who lead dissolute lives blame organized religion for things that are the consequence of human nature. If you seriously examined the question you would probably find that organized religion has a net positive impact on communities.
There are 10s of thousands of sects, churches and denominations in Christianity. But when Jesus walked on earth he established only one church, which is it?
I have been committed to Catholicism but recently I read St Photius' treatise on orthodox triadology, The Mystery of the Trinity, which has made me question whether the Catholics were right about the filioque.
I think those are the only real options. If you're not Catholic or Orthodox, you're ignoring history. I don't find the Protestant claims all that plausible. So Catholic or Orthodox, that's it.
If they pray to Mary or the Saints, they're not Christian.
If they doubt the divinity of Christ, they're not Christian.
If they believe in determinism instead of free will, they're not Christian.
The point of praying to saints is to petition them to help you or to honor them. The Greek language makes a clear distinction between worship and honor. When you talk to a protestant it's like every act of positive recognition is worship.
I firmly believe that "true" Christianity according to the New Testament should be a mix of spiritual Communitarianism and flower-power hippy teachings.
The Rev. Sandra Nikkel, head pastor of Conklin Reformed Church:
“There are certainly some parallels between the teachings of Jesus and those of communism, but the axle which holds them together is radically different. Communism encourages people to riot against the oppression of the rich and all governmental structures, in favor of a government that owns the means of production and natural resources. Jesus encourages people to riot against the oppression of sin and all forms of evil, in favor of a Kingdom that promotes love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, and faithfulness. Communism is about using force and intimidation to gain equality. Jesus’s Kingdom is about love and sacrifice—for God and for our neighbor—and he promotes a Kingdom where equality is the natural result of putting other people’s interests above ours".
In conclusion, I think some of the sects and cults that live in communal housing are more closer to New Testament Christianity, whereas Christian Evangelists draw more of their ideas from the Old Testament.
I firmly believe that "true" Christianity according to the New Testament should be a mix of spiritual Communitarianism and flower-power hippy teachings.
The Rev. Sandra Nikkel, head pastor of Conklin Reformed Church:
“There are certainly some parallels between the teachings of Jesus and those of communism, but the axle which holds them together is radically different. Communism encourages people to riot against the oppression of the rich and all governmental structures, in favor of a government that owns the means of production and natural resources. Jesus encourages people to riot against the oppression of sin and all forms of evil, in favor of a Kingdom that promotes love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, and faithfulness. Communism is about using force and intimidation to gain equality. Jesus’s Kingdom is about love and sacrifice—for God and for our neighbor—and he promotes a Kingdom where equality is the natural result of putting other people’s interests above ours".
In conclusion, I think some of the sects and cults that live in communal housing are more closer to New Testament Christianity, whereas Christian Evangelists draw more of their ideas from the Old Testament.
Then why didn't Jesus condemn slavery in the New Testament?
Theologically, there is basically agreement. Everyone can agree on "proceeds from the Father THROUGH the son", even if no one puts those words in the Creed because both Churches understand that the original source of the Spirit procession is the Father, and yet the Son as a mediate channel of this procession. The Son plays a role, but the role is different. For example, the biblical reference is John 15:26 "When the Advocate comes whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth that proceeds from the Father, he will testify to me."
Now we come to the wording. The original Nicene Creed had neither, but the words under debate (not the Filoque but ANY words referring to the procession of the Holy Spirit) were added at the Council of Constantinople. The words were added to combat the heresy of Macedonianism, which believed that the Spirit was a creation of the Son, subservient to Father and Son. It was used at the Council of Chalcedon (together with the original Nicene Creed.)
There is (apparently) a subtle difference in the word meaning in Latin and Greek, both of which translate to "proceed". In Greek, the word can only refer to coming from its ultimate source, where in Latin it can come from a mediating channel.
The Latin Church adopted the Filioque wording in order to stress the equality and coopertion of the three Persons (in opposition to Arianism, for example, which rejected that the Son was equal in Divinity to the Father). The Greek Church did not use the Filioque because they wanted to stress the distinction of the three Persons (in opposition to Monarchianism, that says they are just three characterizations of the same God).