OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Religious Topics => Topic started by: antiderivative on June 10, 2008, 09:00:31 PM

Title: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: antiderivative on June 10, 2008, 09:00:31 PM
I always wonder how Fundies got around church history, well, here's a historically accurate* chart of church history. I found this off our beloved website: http://jesus-is-savior.com/

If you ever happen to be bored, check out the this website and learn how the Greek Orthodox reject icon worship, but the Russian Orthodox worship icons (according to them).


Well, here's the time line:
http://users.aol.com/libcfl/chart.htm







*not really
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: ComingHome on June 10, 2008, 11:09:31 PM
From the "accurate" timeline:   “The horizontal lines at the bottom have between them the nicknames given to Baptists during the passing years and ages -- Novations, Montanists, Paulicians and Waldenses.”

Novatians—“held a strict view that refused readmission to communion of lapsi, those baptized Christians who had denied their faith or performed the formalities of a ritual sacrifice to the pagan gods” 

 Montanists—early Pentecostal/Charismatic types who prophesied and believed that if a person ever fell from grace they could not be restored. 

Paulicians—dualistic, believing the Evil Spirit was the creator of this world, rejected the Old Testament, and rejected all outward administration of the Sacraments. 

Waldenses—had bishops, priests and deacons who could be either gender,  believed it was a sin against the Holy Ghost to betray one of their own group,  and their priests were believed to return to heaven periodically to renew their faith.

All I can say is, if the Baptists want to claim these folks as their forebears they can have them.  But it certainly is an interesting (to say the very least) family tree, if you ask me. 

Thank God that the truth will still make us free!
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: antiderivative on June 10, 2008, 11:37:10 PM
I like how he says icons were invented in the 7th ecumenical council.

So now even some Baptists are trying to claim apostolic succession! This is a very poor attempt though.
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: prodromas on June 11, 2008, 01:53:07 AM
I always wonder how Fundies got around church history, well, here's a historically accurate* chart of church history. I found this off our beloved website: http://jesus-is-savior.com/

If you ever happen to be bored, check out the this website and learn how the Greek Orthodox reject icon worship, but the Russian Orthodox worship icons (according to them).


Well, here's the time line:
http://users.aol.com/libcfl/chart.htm

*not really

First of all just graphically its an awful time line I can see anything. This guy is amazing I wish I could believe something like that.
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: Quinault on June 11, 2008, 03:32:01 PM
Oh! This is written by an Anabaptist! That explains it. My brother in law is an Anabaptist pastor. Before he was ordained he was a little nutty, but now...whooo boy!
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: Fr. George on June 11, 2008, 03:56:13 PM
It's an old chart... and it's old BS.
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: antiderivative on June 11, 2008, 05:48:15 PM
It's a very feeble attempt made by Baptists to claim Apostolic Succession. The historical inaccuracies of this chart could be refuted by anyone who had any basic knowledge of Church History. Sadly, many people are taught that the church fell into total corruption after the apostles, then magically reappeared with Martin Luther.

I used to go to a Protestant school, and there church history meant studying Acts then skipping to the Protestant Reformation.


In case anyone wants some more entertainment, just look around more at http://jesus-is-savior.com/. It's getting to be my number one favorite for world's wackiest websites. 
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: Fr. George on June 11, 2008, 05:56:16 PM
It's a very feeble attempt made by Baptists to claim Apostolic Succession. The historical inaccuracies of this chart could be refuted by anyone who had any basic knowledge of Church History. Sadly, this is what most Protestants are taught and nothing else.

I used to go to a Protestant school, and there church history meant studying Acts then skipping to the Protestant Reformation. 

It would be interesting if you (and other folks who have gotten religious training in various Protestant Churches) were to start a thread or two documenting what kind of education you received (not just general points, but specifics).  Sort of a thorough overview of the talking points re: history, apostolic succession, etc.  I know that many on the board know such points, but (a) that doesn't mean all of us do, (b) the groups commonly labeled "Protestant" are actually quite different, and probably have very different approaches to some of the subject areas (like exegesis, Church authority, apostolic succession, etc.).  Collect the various specific and in-depth teachings in one place (as reference threads), and then have parallel threads with thought-through responses (not in the same threads as the information, so as not to confuse the material).
Title: Re: An Accurate Timeline of Church History
Post by: jnorm888 on June 11, 2008, 10:55:30 PM
I maybe wrong, but I think the view is called:

"The Trail of blood"


Some in the Church of Christ may hold to it, some landmark Baptists may hold to it, and like someone else said......some Anabaptists may also hold to it. I could be wrong again......but I think some Seventh Day Adventists may hold to it as well.

I know David Bercot use to hold to something like that......who knows, maybe he still does....I've been out of that loop for years.


but yeah, it's called "The trail of blood".

Most educated conservative protestant groups reject that view.


Most of the groups they claim as their descendants will reject them. Also alot of different protestant groups claim the same people....and they all believe different things in regards to doctrine.....so the whole thing is corny.





JNORM888