OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Religious Topics => Topic started by: tweety234 on January 05, 2013, 02:23:13 PM

Title: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 05, 2013, 02:23:13 PM
Are you more than 1000% sure?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Arachne on January 05, 2013, 02:58:18 PM
Several years of study have convinced me that there is no other Christian group that could tempt me to switch allegiances.

Once the wholeness of truth has been seen, the plotholes in other setups become more conspicuous than ever.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Punch on January 05, 2013, 04:13:10 PM
I don't intend to cease being Orthodox, even after the "Orthodox Church" apostatizes.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Nathanael on January 05, 2013, 06:02:38 PM
1 Corinthians 10,12: "So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall!"
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 05, 2013, 06:22:41 PM
Well, I've already failed today, so that's out of the way.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Punch on January 05, 2013, 06:23:38 PM
1 Corinthians 10,12: "So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall!"

You have to be standing before you can fall.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: mike on January 05, 2013, 06:30:59 PM
I don't intend to cease being Orthodox, even after the "Orthodox Church" apostatizes.

Made me chuckle.

That's the spirit!
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: truthseeker32 on January 05, 2013, 06:34:42 PM
Because I have taken my time in figuring things out, and have attempted to be meticulous in the process, I am confident that wherever I end up (likely Eastern Catholicism) will be for good.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 05, 2013, 09:09:04 PM
1 Corinthians 10,12: "So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall!"

are you reading my mind?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Basil 320 on January 05, 2013, 09:10:17 PM
Wholly committed to Eastern Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 05, 2013, 09:11:38 PM
Because I have taken my time in figuring things out, and have attempted to be meticulous in the process, I am confident that wherever I end up (likely Eastern Catholicism) will be for good.

Catholicism? I thought you were an Orthodox. unless i am mistaken.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 05, 2013, 09:13:03 PM
Well, I've already failed today, so that's out of the way.

how did you fail buddy? what have you done?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Aindriú on January 05, 2013, 09:15:28 PM
Well, I've already failed today, so that's out of the way.

how did you fail buddy? what have you done?

LOL, this forum needs a male/female icon on profiles....
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 05, 2013, 09:37:04 PM
Yes, I am 1014% sure, because when I make my mind up I never ever change it!  :)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: FormerReformer on January 05, 2013, 09:37:42 PM
Well, I've already failed today, so that's out of the way.

how did you fail buddy? what have you done?

LOL, this forum needs a male/female icon on profiles....

I agree with the hot chick. This gender confusion needs to stop.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Aindriú on January 05, 2013, 09:42:19 PM
YAY! I'm hot!
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: truthseeker32 on January 06, 2013, 12:46:25 AM
Because I have taken my time in figuring things out, and have attempted to be meticulous in the process, I am confident that wherever I end up (likely Eastern Catholicism) will be for good.

Catholicism? I thought you were an Orthodox. unless i am mistaken.
No, I am not Orthodox. As I have said in other threads, I have studied Orthodoxy quite a bit and continue to study it, but in the end I found myself leaning towards Rome. That being said, I still have a great love for the Eastern Christian tradition, which is why I feel at home as an Eastern Catholic.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 01:01:18 AM
Because I have taken my time in figuring things out, and have attempted to be meticulous in the process, I am confident that wherever I end up (likely Eastern Catholicism) will be for good.

Catholicism? I thought you were an Orthodox. unless i am mistaken.
No, I am not Orthodox. As I have said in other threads, I have studied Orthodoxy quite a bit and continue to study it, but in the end I found myself leaning towards Rome. That being said, I still have a great love for the Eastern Christian tradition, which is why I feel at home as an Eastern Catholic.

Eastern Catholicism has always boggled my mind.  The theological language which the Romans use often seems to contradict the Eastern understanding of the Faith, and many Roman Catholics today would not understand an Eastern or Oriental Catholic's point of view when it came to many of their cherished doctrines. 

As to denomination, I can't say that I will never change.  It has been very tough for me before, and Orthodoxy is not an easy religion to practice.  I suppose a part of me is still accustomed to the way I was raised as a Baptist, by just "believing" and letting God do the rest.  Yet "narrow is the gate and strait is the way, and few there be that find it" -- I have no doubts about that part.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: JamesR on January 06, 2013, 02:18:53 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 02:23:12 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: simplygermain on January 06, 2013, 02:38:01 AM
I have no desire to be anything than what the Lord has given me, for He gave it as a gift. For me to deny His church, is to deny Him. Who was it that said? ...How can a man have God as His father without the church as His mother?
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, mind and soul and lean not on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him and He will direct your path.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 06, 2013, 03:10:46 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy.  

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't true, then no other religion is true and no God exists.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 03:13:38 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't try, then no other religion is true and no God exists.

Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 03:14:49 AM
Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.

Some people want to redefine the word so that atheism is a religion. Other people want to redefine the word so that Orthodoxy is not a religion. Sometimes you get to do a double facepalm when the same person does both.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 06, 2013, 03:21:02 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't try, then no other religion is true and no God exists.

Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.

Religions isn't worship of a god or gods, though it sometimes involves that. Buddhism is a religion, modern Atheism is a religion. A visit to Wikipedia or Dictionary.com will show good definitions of religion.

I would say that a man like Neil Degrasse Tyson isn't religious, whereas a man like Richard Dawkins is highly religious. One is apathetic toward religion and even towards atheism, he's a scientist and doesn't care much for such debate; the other has dedicated his whole life and being towards atheism and furthering its philosophy, doctrine and membership using a lot of rhetoric similar to Protestant Fundamentalists.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 03:32:02 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

"buddhism" worships a "budda" and  "atheism" believes in nothingness, both false religions.

There can only be One True Religion and that is Christianity.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 03:35:03 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

"buddhism" worships a "budda" and  "atheism" believes in nothingness, both false religions.

There can only be One True Religion and that is Christianity.

It would be closer to the truth to say that they venerate him.  Worship would be inaccurate.  You can study the life of Gautama Buddha, meditate on his statue -- but no one considers him a god.  Although sometimes it may appear as such, and that's because things have a hard time being translated into English from say Tibetan or Pali.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 03:37:33 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't try, then no other religion is true and no God exists.

Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.

Religions isn't worship of a god or gods, though it sometimes involves that. Buddhism is a religion, modern Atheism is a religion. A visit to Wikipedia or Dictionary.com will show good definitions of religion.

I would say that a man like Neil Degrasse Tyson isn't religious, whereas a man like Richard Dawkins is highly religious. One is apathetic toward religion and even towards atheism, he's a scientist and doesn't care much for such debate; the other has dedicated his whole life and being towards atheism and furthering its philosophy, doctrine and membership using a lot of rhetoric similar to Protestant Fundamentalists.

Yes and I saw no definition which indicates atheism would be a religion.

".
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

Atheism is not about believing or not believing in anything.  Most atheists would much rather look at facts, and what can be proven rather than a personal set of beliefs.  That's closer to knowledge and understanding, not a matter of belief and faith.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 03:38:46 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

"buddhism" worships a "budda" and  "atheism" believes in nothingness, both false religions.

There can only be One True Religion and that is Christianity.

It would be closer to the truth to say that they venerate him.  Worship would be inaccurate.  You can study the life of Gautama Buddha, meditate on his statue -- but no one considers him a god.  Although sometimes it may appear as such, and that's because things have a hard time being translated into English from say Tibetan or Pali.

They worship the liar "buddha". as "atheist" worship nothingness, leading their lives nowhere.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 03:40:56 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't try, then no other religion is true and no God exists.

Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.

Religions isn't worship of a god or gods, though it sometimes involves that. Buddhism is a religion, modern Atheism is a religion. A visit to Wikipedia or Dictionary.com will show good definitions of religion.

I would say that a man like Neil Degrasse Tyson isn't religious, whereas a man like Richard Dawkins is highly religious. One is apathetic toward religion and even towards atheism, he's a scientist and doesn't care much for such debate; the other has dedicated his whole life and being towards atheism and furthering its philosophy, doctrine and membership using a lot of rhetoric similar to Protestant Fundamentalists.

Yes and I saw no definition which indicates atheism would be a religion.

".
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

Atheism is not about believing or not believing in anything.  Most atheists would much rather look at facts, and what can be proven rather than a personal set of beliefs.  That's closer to knowledge and understanding, not a matter of belief and faith.

God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) of The Bible is a Fact, an Objective Reality, so your statement is false, "atheist" therefore do not look or know the Facts. Christianity ain't some faith, only a faith when you don't know the Facts, after knowing The Facts it becomes as true as eating dinner, takes no faith or belief for that, it's just a Fact, like the Fact that I exist.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 03:44:10 AM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 04:57:02 AM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: dzheremi on January 06, 2013, 05:01:17 AM
So things are facts because you capitalize them in mid-sentence?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 05:03:58 AM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.

 :o

You'll never convince anybody of anything if you keep writing garbled paragraphs like this. I have no idea what you are talking about.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 05:04:51 AM
So things are facts because you capitalize them in mid-sentence?

According to the School of the Interwebs, I guess so.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 05:14:10 AM
So things are facts because you capitalize them in mid-sentence?

So you could refute what I said by asking an insecure question?

if your going to refute then refute, if you can't then just say it, no need to make yourself look bad. 3 options, Refute, don't refute, or show insecurity by throwing jokes to off put or slide away from a rebuttal.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 05:16:55 AM
You'll never convince anybody of anything if you keep writing garbled paragraphs like this.


All that was in that post was Facts(First Uncaused Cause and Shroud for example), All I need is Proof, Evidence, and Facts, you and "atheist"'s/"agnostics"/"buddhist"/ and anything contrary to The Gospel can keep your wise cracks to yourself, no place for debate.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes you do.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 05:26:38 AM
Do you speak German as your first language? They capitalize nouns, don't they? Also, it would explain why your command of English, even in these days of the series of tubes called the Interwebs, is so very interesting.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: dzheremi on January 06, 2013, 05:35:15 AM
So things are facts because you capitalize them in mid-sentence?

So you could refute what I said by asking an insecure question?

if your going to refute then refute, if you can't then just say it, no need to make yourself look bad. 3 options, Refute, don't refute, or show insecurity by throwing jokes to off put or slide away from a rebuttal.

I don't need to refute anything. You're silly and five and go to your room.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 06:27:02 AM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.

None of those are sciences, those are only related to theology and therefore cannot be considered objective facts. 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 06:28:32 AM
You'll never convince anybody of anything if you keep writing garbled paragraphs like this.


All that was in that post was Facts(First Uncaused Cause and Shroud for example), All I need is Proof, Evidence, and Facts, you and "atheist"'s/"agnostics"/"buddhist"/ and anything contrary to The Gospel can keep your wise cracks to yourself, no place for debate.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes you do.

It gets tiring debating with those who go round in circles, and don't really think carefully about what they're typing...   "Does this make sense?" would be a good question to ask one's self. "Why or why not?"
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ansgar on January 06, 2013, 08:18:13 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

"buddhism" worships a "budda" and  "atheism" believes in nothingness, both false religions.

There can only be One True Religion and that is Christianity.

It would be closer to the truth to say that they venerate him.  Worship would be inaccurate.  You can study the life of Gautama Buddha, meditate on his statue -- but no one considers him a god.  Although sometimes it may appear as such, and that's because things have a hard time being translated into English from say Tibetan or Pali.
This is true, but it is also true that the majority of buddhists in the world worships spirits and gods.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ashman618 on January 06, 2013, 08:59:47 AM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.

So your saying science, philosophy, history and logic determines what is fact, correct?

The ressurection of Christ is not in a sense a verifiable fact to some people cuz they can't observe it, so I think that would qualify as a belief, no? So you would have to present the evidence to prove that belief as fact not the other way around, I think

Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Jetavan on January 06, 2013, 11:05:04 AM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't try, then no other religion is true and no God exists.

Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.
Define "god".
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ebor on January 06, 2013, 12:41:54 PM

They worship the liar "buddha"

No they do not and it's a lot more complicated than that with different sorts of Buddhism.  Presuming that you are referring to Siddhartha Gautama who has the title of "Buddha" what statement of his do you think are "lies"?    Have your read any thing about any form of Buddhism and if so can you tell us what they are please?

Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ebor on January 06, 2013, 01:07:24 PM
So things are facts because you capitalize them in mid-sentence?

So you could refute what I said by asking an insecure question?

if your going to refute then refute, if you can't then just say it, no need to make yourself look bad. 3 options, Refute, don't refute, or show insecurity by throwing jokes to off put or slide away from a rebuttal.

To refute your opinions would involve presenting countering ideas and support for them. is that correct?  Will you address things that people write that disagree with you?  If so, can we narrow it down to one at a time to focus a bit more?

How about History?  You have the Bible under History in your paragraph.  Yes the Bible exists but what do you know about the history of the Bible?  It was written and compiled over many centuries.  It was also translated into different languages. It is made up of different sorts of writing including poetry, praise, instruction and historical accounts. 
What do you really know about the history of the Bible?  Do you have a particular translation that you prefer?  If so, do you know how it came to be made?

Here is a link to a book on the history of the King James Version (which did include the Apocrypha by the way)  called "God's Secretaries"
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Secretaries-Making-James-Bible/dp/0060838736

and one on how it came to be from "British Library":
http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/kingjames.html

I am starting with this translation because it is widely known.

Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 02:29:33 PM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.

None of those are sciences, those are only related to theology and therefore cannot be considered objective facts. 

Either you're lying or you're naive, lets use The First Uncaused Cause for example, this is a Scientific Fact, if it ain't then you will properly refute it, now,


An Infinite Past of Anything in Succession(Matter, Time, Space, Energy, Change, cause & effect etc) is a Impossibility. if the past was infinite we would never get to the present, count down from Infinity to zero. therefore anything in succession must have a beginning in the finite past. which means it is an indeniable Fact that once nothing existed.(evident by this and the big bang)


Since infinite amount of past cause and effect is impossible it had to start, which means there is a cause which has no cause, The First Uncaused Cause.

The Cause is,

- Uncaused since has no cause

- Beginningless since if began to exist must have a cause.

-Changeless since an Infinite Amount of past change is impossible and a change requires a cause, First Uncaused Cause has no cause

- Timeless since changeless, no change, and no Time.

- Eternal since has always existed, is changeless(ceasing to exist would be a change) and is Timeless.

- Spaceless since Timeless and changeless, things in space are ever changing and are in time.

- Immaterial since Timeless and Changless, matter is ever changing, changeless material doesn't exist, and changeless material cannot cause anything, therefore Immaterial.

-All Powerful since created everything and lesser doesn't produce the greater.

- Of Which No Greater Can Be Conceived since Created Everything.

Now that was part 1,

Part 2,

3 Indeinable Facts

1, Whatever Begins to exists has a cause

2, The Universe began to exist(infinite regression is impossible, big bang, and Borde, Guide, Valienkin Theorem make this an irrefutable Fact.)

3, Therefore The Universe has a Cause to it's existence.

The Cause of The Universe is,

-Spaceless and Timeless, since Created/Started/Caused Space and Time, can therefore exist without Space and Time.

- Since Spaceless and Timeless is Changeless

-Since Changeless is Immaterial, and since doesn't change, The Cause didn't start to exist, making it The First Uncaused Cause.

The First Uncaused Cause is The Cause of The Universe.

Now time to prove that this is without a shadow of a doubt God(which means whether "macro-evolution" happened or not, God exists and you have to accept that)

1. That fits God's description to a tee.

2. The First Uncaused Cause is The Direct Cause of The Universe, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) is a First Uncaused Cause who Directly Caused The Universe.

3, Is Immaterial therefore can either be a Mind or Abstract Object such as numbers(The Mind is immaterial and we'll get to that later), Abstract objects cause nothing, therefore a Mind.

4, Fine Tuning, The Universe is so fine tuned for life that there's only 3 possibilities as to why,

Law, Chance, or Design. Cannot be law or chance, since Law can be different and Chance is Extremely Improbable that it's Factual it didn't happen that way, therefore Obviously Designed.

5, Only 2 types of causes. Accidential/Mindless or Intentional/Mind, Accidents require a prior cause, therefore cannot be accidential therefore caused on Purpose, God exists.

6, All "naturalistic" theories are Impossible.

1, "naturalism" is disproven by The Universe being caused so by default Supernatural and Immaterial exists.

2, Nothing existed and nothing causes nothing, the "nothing causes something" Quantum Mechanics argument proposed by w-child has been thrown in the fire with these facts,

1, The Quantum Vaccum isn't empty space.

2, Nothing cannot cause something with this fact,

The Cause of an effect must be equivelent or greater than it's effect,

Nothing has no properties, something has properties. so for nothing to cause something it would need the properties to do so, so if nothing caused something, it needs to properties of something rendering it to be something instead of nothing! and if nothing caused something it would need the properties from something eternal rendering it again not nothing.

Nothing can only cause, nothing.

and the "universe caused itself" argument(whoever posed this argument needs their liscense revoked, is automatically void as if the universe caused itself it would have already needed to exist!.

And lastly as proven in #5 can only have been caused on purpose.

There is no naturalistic explanation as 1, Supernatural exist, 2, it's impossible for nothing to cause something and 3, it is an impossiblity for The First Uncaused Cause to cause on accident.

#7, Creation ex nihilo proves The Bible is even more Scientifically Accurate and Correct, Creation ex Nihilo proves God exists and God is The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit who is 1 God that is 3 Persons.

God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) existence is a Fact.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 02:38:59 PM
SBC, you don't have to answer this if you don't want to, but I thought I would ask.

Are you trying to test out materials for a possible college paper?

It looks as if some of your posts are meant to be that way. Just wondering.

 ???
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Arachne on January 06, 2013, 02:43:10 PM
If he is, he needs to improve his capitalisation, pronto. Random shift strokes won't cut it.

/redpen
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 02:43:19 PM
To refute your opinions would involve presenting countering ideas and support for them. is that correct?  Will you address things that people write that disagree with you?  If so, can we narrow it down to one at a time to focus a bit more?

How about History?  You have the Bible under History in your paragraph.  Yes the Bible exists but what do you know about the history of the Bible?  It was written and compiled over many centuries.  It was also translated into different languages. It is made up of different sorts of writing including poetry, praise, instruction and historical accounts. 
What do you really know about the history of the Bible?  Do you have a particular translation that you prefer?  If so, do you know how it came to be made?

Having translation problems mean nothing, we have Alot of Manuscripts, The Bible is the most accurate Historical Document in Ancient History, http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Here is a link to a book on the history of the King James Version (which did include the Apocrypha by the way)  called "God's Secretaries"
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Secretaries-Making-James-Bible/dp/0060838736

I am starting with this translation because it is widely known.

I don't care about The King James Version, we got The Manuscripts, King James is therefore not needed  in this debate,

The problem now is just folks don't know how to easily Translate things, for example the best Translation now would be The NIV, yet it has problems, for example, http://www.jasonstaples.com/blog/2009/most-misinterpreted-bible-passages-1-matthew-527-28-18

Also,, Jesus Christ Resurrection is a Fact,

Going through every "naturalistic" myth and will leave The Resurrection as The Only Explanation, not best or most probable but Only Explanation.

proving that Jesus Christ existed and there was an empty tomb factually follows that He rose from the dead.

myth theory -

Different points of views, no contradiction from The Apostles means events happened. miracles are authentic as they are written in witness and have evidence of addition, exaggeration, or lies.

Josephus proves Jesus Christ was crucified, no matter what you say this man was a Jew, had no biased or presupposition.

Nazareth Inscription proves empty tomb.

Women found the tomb empty, this irrefutable, criteria of embarrassment

Matthew 28:11-18 proves without a doubt there was an empty tomb, Matthew refutes the Jews, no matter what you say or what you think he REFUTES what the Jews were saying, which proves, the Jews were claiming they stole the tomb. a common presupposition and excuse.

My fellow Christians told the truth of The Resurrection and the Jews spread the stolen tomb myth, either way EMPTY TOMB, of who? Jesus Christ, why was there a tomb? He was crucified, why? because the Jews thought He committed blasphemy why was there an empty tomb? we will get to that next. Apostles died for their beliefs and appearances are genuine(will get to it next)

"myth theory" is long gone and dead. if you EVER claim myth then you are a presuppositional delusional hypocritical, the words could go on and on.

myth "theory" is now an impossible myth.


conspiracy theory - 1, No one could have stolen the tomb as it was blocked by roman guards.

2, Apostles had nothing to gain, criteria of embarrassment, they were shamed and were against all evil, sin.

3, They died for their beliefs, 11 of the 12 Apostles died for their beliefs, no one dies for a known lie, they really believed in The Resurrection added that with the facts of the appearances.

4, Appearances to Women, proves Apostles were telling the truth

5, James, the brother of Jesus Christ in The Gospels is a skeptic, outside of it he's a believer(Letters, Church, and Josephus) Jesus had to have appeared to him.

6, Paul, a prosecutor of Christians becomes a Christian himself and becomes a leading preacher of Christianity going through all kinds of suffering and ultimately death for his beliefs.

7, Apostles believed in The Resurrection despite every predispostion to the contrary, no one believed The Messiah was going to die, be God, or much less Resurrect from the dead. no one believed in The Resurrection until the end of world, the general Resurrection.

Apostles believed The Resurrection happened, myth and conspiracy theories are now myths, if you want to argue you can only use your last 3 "naturalistic" myths when arguing with me because the myth and conspiracy theories are dead myths now, using them or believing them exposes you as a hypocrite as those are now Impossible Explanations.


Now we have a few facts,

Jesus Christ was crucified
There was an Empty Tomb
Jesus Christ appeared alive after His death to several people
Apostles really believed in The Resurrection


last 3 which are easily refutatable.

"twin brother/lookalike" theory - Apostles knew Jesus, saw Him perform more miracles, Empty Tomb and no one could have stolen the tomb, had same wounds, no known twin brother as James, Jesus half brother, would take that into consideration. and theory is a stretch.

"twin brother/lookalike" theory is a myth

swoon theory - Apostles saw Jesus Christ die, He was anointed, stabbed in chest pouring blood and water confirming death, romans made sure you die when crucified, even if survived would have been impossible to escape tomb, would've died later, would not convince apostles, and Jesus Christ Ascended.

swoon theory is now a myth

last theory that if I disprove I prove The Resurrection happened.

hallucination theory - Apostles were in their right minds, died for their beliefs, hallucinations are fast and quick, Thomas for example put his hand in Jesus side, you don't have multiple hallucinations about the same thing, and finally multiple people do not hallucinate about the same thing.

EVERY Single "naturalistic" "theory" has been made a myth of.

There is one Irrefutable Explanation, not the best but The Only Explanation is that Jesus Christ died on the cross and Resurrected from the dead, therefore proving everything in The Bible as a fact.

Jesus Christ Resurrected from the dead.

add that with The Shroud which has no evidence of forgery, not a painting, cannot be reproduced with any type of technology, and caused by a burst of light from the dead body causing an image like a photography.

With The facts of The Bible's inerrancy and no contradiction, The Sense it makes, reliable Testimony/Accounts, Scientific Accuracy and foreknowledge, Historical Accuracy and foreknowledge, God's existence and failure of other religions making Christianity the only factual possibility, Physical evidence in The Shroud and Only Explanation being The Resurrection, it is indeniable, God Exists, Jesus Christ is Lord, Our Savior who died for our sins on the cross, Jesus Christ is the 2nd person of God, and that God is The Trinity of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.



So on history you've been refuted, pick another area now.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 02:45:10 PM
If he is, he needs to improve his capitalisation, pronto. Random shift strokes won't cut it.

/redpen

I repeat myself, but I think he or she may be German, because I think they capitalize nouns. I'm not aware of other languages in which they do that. Just a thought.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: J Michael on January 06, 2013, 02:48:22 PM
Denominations are for Protestants.  I'm pretty sure I won't become a Protestant.  ;D  (But, what do I know?)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ansgar on January 06, 2013, 02:59:23 PM
To refute your opinions would involve presenting countering ideas and support for them. is that correct?  Will you address things that people write that disagree with you?  If so, can we narrow it down to one at a time to focus a bit more?

How about History?  You have the Bible under History in your paragraph.  Yes the Bible exists but what do you know about the history of the Bible?  It was written and compiled over many centuries.  It was also translated into different languages. It is made up of different sorts of writing including poetry, praise, instruction and historical accounts. 
What do you really know about the history of the Bible?  Do you have a particular translation that you prefer?  If so, do you know how it came to be made?

Having translation problems mean nothing, we have Alot of Manuscripts, The Bible is the most accurate Historical Document in Ancient History, http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Here is a link to a book on the history of the King James Version (which did include the Apocrypha by the way)  called "God's Secretaries"
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Secretaries-Making-James-Bible/dp/0060838736

I am starting with this translation because it is widely known.

I don't care about The King James Version, we got The Manuscripts, King James is therefore not needed  in this debate,

The problem now is just folks don't know how to easily Translate things, for example the best Translation now would be The NIV, yet it has problems, for example, http://www.jasonstaples.com/blog/2009/most-misinterpreted-bible-passages-1-matthew-527-28-18

Also,, Jesus Christ Resurrection is a Fact,

Going through every "naturalistic" myth and will leave The Resurrection as The Only Explanation, not best or most probable but Only Explanation.

proving that Jesus Christ existed and there was an empty tomb factually follows that He rose from the dead.

myth theory -

Different points of views, no contradiction from The Apostles means events happened. miracles are authentic as they are written in witness and have evidence of addition, exaggeration, or lies.

Josephus proves Jesus Christ was crucified, no matter what you say this man was a Jew, had no biased or presupposition.

Nazareth Inscription proves empty tomb.

Women found the tomb empty, this irrefutable, criteria of embarrassment

Matthew 28:11-18 proves without a doubt there was an empty tomb, Matthew refutes the Jews, no matter what you say or what you think he REFUTES what the Jews were saying, which proves, the Jews were claiming they stole the tomb. a common presupposition and excuse.

My fellow Christians told the truth of The Resurrection and the Jews spread the stolen tomb myth, either way EMPTY TOMB, of who? Jesus Christ, why was there a tomb? He was crucified, why? because the Jews thought He committed blasphemy why was there an empty tomb? we will get to that next. Apostles died for their beliefs and appearances are genuine(will get to it next)

"myth theory" is long gone and dead. if you EVER claim myth then you are a presuppositional delusional hypocritical, the words could go on and on.

myth "theory" is now an impossible myth.


conspiracy theory - 1, No one could have stolen the tomb as it was blocked by roman guards.

2, Apostles had nothing to gain, criteria of embarrassment, they were shamed and were against all evil, sin.

3, They died for their beliefs, 11 of the 12 Apostles died for their beliefs, no one dies for a known lie, they really believed in The Resurrection added that with the facts of the appearances.

4, Appearances to Women, proves Apostles were telling the truth

5, James, the brother of Jesus Christ in The Gospels is a skeptic, outside of it he's a believer(Letters, Church, and Josephus) Jesus had to have appeared to him.

6, Paul, a prosecutor of Christians becomes a Christian himself and becomes a leading preacher of Christianity going through all kinds of suffering and ultimately death for his beliefs.

7, Apostles believed in The Resurrection despite every predispostion to the contrary, no one believed The Messiah was going to die, be God, or much less Resurrect from the dead. no one believed in The Resurrection until the end of world, the general Resurrection.

Apostles believed The Resurrection happened, myth and conspiracy theories are now myths, if you want to argue you can only use your last 3 "naturalistic" myths when arguing with me because the myth and conspiracy theories are dead myths now, using them or believing them exposes you as a hypocrite as those are now Impossible Explanations.


Now we have a few facts,

Jesus Christ was crucified
There was an Empty Tomb
Jesus Christ appeared alive after His death to several people
Apostles really believed in The Resurrection


last 3 which are easily refutatable.

"twin brother/lookalike" theory - Apostles knew Jesus, saw Him perform more miracles, Empty Tomb and no one could have stolen the tomb, had same wounds, no known twin brother as James, Jesus half brother, would take that into consideration. and theory is a stretch.

"twin brother/lookalike" theory is a myth

swoon theory - Apostles saw Jesus Christ die, He was anointed, stabbed in chest pouring blood and water confirming death, romans made sure you die when crucified, even if survived would have been impossible to escape tomb, would've died later, would not convince apostles, and Jesus Christ Ascended.

swoon theory is now a myth

last theory that if I disprove I prove The Resurrection happened.

hallucination theory - Apostles were in their right minds, died for their beliefs, hallucinations are fast and quick, Thomas for example put his hand in Jesus side, you don't have multiple hallucinations about the same thing, and finally multiple people do not hallucinate about the same thing.

EVERY Single "naturalistic" "theory" has been made a myth of.

There is one Irrefutable Explanation, not the best but The Only Explanation is that Jesus Christ died on the cross and Resurrected from the dead, therefore proving everything in The Bible as a fact.

Jesus Christ Resurrected from the dead.

add that with The Shroud which has no evidence of forgery, not a painting, cannot be reproduced with any type of technology, and caused by a burst of light from the dead body causing an image like a photography.

With The facts of The Bible's inerrancy and no contradiction, The Sense it makes, reliable Testimony/Accounts, Scientific Accuracy and foreknowledge, Historical Accuracy and foreknowledge, God's existence and failure of other religions making Christianity the only factual possibility, Physical evidence in The Shroud and Only Explanation being The Resurrection, it is indeniable, God Exists, Jesus Christ is Lord, Our Savior who died for our sins on the cross, Jesus Christ is the 2nd person of God, and that God is The Trinity of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.



So on history you've been refuted, pick another area now.
Nobody here is denying the resurrection of Christ. He was asking you if you knew about the historical origin of the Bible. 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: truthseeker32 on January 06, 2013, 03:23:28 PM
Eastern Catholicism has always boggled my mind.  The theological language which the Romans use often seems to contradict the Eastern understanding of the Faith, and many Roman Catholics today would not understand an Eastern or Oriental Catholic's point of view when it came to many of their cherished doctrines. 

You aren't the first person I have heard make this claim, and I have yet to be convinced that it is true. Rather than seeing them as in conflict, I see them as complementary.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ebor on January 06, 2013, 03:59:10 PM
To refute your opinions would involve presenting countering ideas and support for them. is that correct?  Will you address things that people write that disagree with you?  If so, can we narrow it down to one at a time to focus a bit more?

How about History?  You have the Bible under History in your paragraph.  Yes the Bible exists but what do you know about the history of the Bible?  It was written and compiled over many centuries.  It was also translated into different languages. It is made up of different sorts of writing including poetry, praise, instruction and historical accounts.  
What do you really know about the history of the Bible?  Do you have a particular translation that you prefer?  If so, do you know how it came to be made?

Having translation problems mean nothing, we have Alot of Manuscripts, The Bible is the most accurate Historical Document in Ancient History, http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Thank you for the link..  Do you understand that many of the "manuscripts" are not complete books or complete Bibles but fragments or portions?  Even the page you linked to says that they are fragments. Do you use the CARM site for your ideas?  Why do you trust them as reliable?  

The 66 books that make up the Bible today, not counting the Apocrypha, were not put together into one group for some time.  There were canons that were established starting in the 4th Century with the Emperor Constantine.  F.F. Bruce's book The Canon of Scripture is a good book on this.

Quote
Here is a link to a book on the history of the King James Version (which did include the Apocrypha by the way)  called "God's Secretaries"
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Secretaries-Making-James-Bible/dp/0060838736

I am starting with this translation because it is widely known.

I don't care about The King James Version, we got The Manuscripts, King James is therefore not needed  in this debate,

Can you read Hebrew or Greek or Aramaic?  Do you have access to the "Manuscripts" fragments and older volumes?  
The translations do matter because they are how people who do not read those languages/have access to the materials have the Bible.

Quote
The problem now is just folks don't know how to easily Translate things, for example the best Translation now would be The NIV, yet it has problems, for example, http://www.jasonstaples.com/blog/2009/most-misinterpreted-bible-passages-1-matthew-527-28-18

Have you ever translated anything from one language to another?  Do you speak/read any other languages?  You've made a claim here that the NIV is the "best Translation".  Prove it.  Who else likes it?

I'll have to check this gentleman that you linked to, but you posting it doesn't mean that it is necessarily accurate.  I believe that in one of your earlier posts you were making claims about that particular passage of scripture.  Did you just cut and paste from the linked site?

Addressing one or two ideas at a time can make discussion easier. Why did you just post more claims?  

You did not "refute" me but just posted things that I had not written about. At no point did I write anything denying the Resurrection of Our Lord.  Therefore you did not address my point but, in effect, tried to put "words in my mouth" which I never said.  Therefore, you attributed something to me that was not True.  

 What do you personally know about how History is studied and how real historians work?




Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: J Michael on January 06, 2013, 04:09:47 PM
To refute your opinions would involve presenting countering ideas and support for them. is that correct?  Will you address things that people write that disagree with you?  If so, can we narrow it down to one at a time to focus a bit more?

How about History?  You have the Bible under History in your paragraph.  Yes the Bible exists but what do you know about the history of the Bible?  It was written and compiled over many centuries.  It was also translated into different languages. It is made up of different sorts of writing including poetry, praise, instruction and historical accounts.  
What do you really know about the history of the Bible?  Do you have a particular translation that you prefer?  If so, do you know how it came to be made?

Having translation problems mean nothing, we have Alot of Manuscripts, The Bible is the most accurate Historical Document in Ancient History, http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Thank you for the link..  Do you understand that many of the "manuscripts" are not complete books or complete Bibles but fragments or portions?  Even the page you linked to says that they are fragments. Do you use the CARM site for your ideas?  Why do you trust them as reliable?  

The 66 books that make up the Bible today, not counting the Apocrypha, were not put together into one group for some time.  There were canons that were established starting in the 4th Century with the Emperor Constantine.  F.F. Bruce's book The Canon of Scripture is a good book on this.

Quote
Here is a link to a book on the history of the King James Version (which did include the Apocrypha by the way)  called "God's Secretaries"
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Secretaries-Making-James-Bible/dp/0060838736

I am starting with this translation because it is widely known.

I don't care about The King James Version, we got The Manuscripts, King James is therefore not needed  in this debate,

Can you read Hebrew or Greek or Aramaic?  Do you have access to the "Manuscripts" fragments and older volumes?  
The translations do matter because they are how people who do not read those languages/have access to the materials have the Bible.

Quote
The problem now is just folks don't know how to easily Translate things, for example the best Translation now would be The NIV, yet it has problems, for example, http://www.jasonstaples.com/blog/2009/most-misinterpreted-bible-passages-1-matthew-527-28-18

Have you ever translated anything from one language to another?  Do you speak/read any other languages?  You've made a claim here that the NIV is the "best Translation".  Prove it.  Who else likes it?

I'll have to check this gentleman that you linked to, but you posting it doesn't mean that it is necessarily accurate.  I believe that in one of your earlier posts you were making claims about that particular passage of scripture.  Did you just cut and paste from the linked site?

Addressing one or two ideas at a time can make discussion easier. Why did you just post more claims?  

You did not "refute" me but just posted things that I had not written about. At no point did I write anything denying the Resurrection of Our Lord.  Therefore you did not address my point but, in effect, tried to put "words in my mouth" which I never said.  Therefore, you attributed something to me that was not True.  

 What do you personally know about how History is studied and how real historians work?






Like I said in another thread about SBC, "He's 18, if I remember correctly.  Ergo, he knows everything (but not quite as much as a 16 or 17 year old).  ;D"
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Alpo on January 06, 2013, 04:14:16 PM
If I stick with traditional Christianity, I will stick with Orthodoxy but I'm not exactly sure whether I will stick with traditional Christianity for the rest of my life. I'm somewhat conservative as a person though so I wouldn't be so suprised if I stayed in the fold despite turning into an augustin copycat. At least I had dignified culture and tradition left despite losing faith in Orthodoxy as an explicit institutional religion.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 04:25:06 PM
I can't remember the last time I disagreed with something you said, but I might today...  :angel:

The 66 books that make up the Bible today, not counting the Apocrypha, were not put together into one group for some time.  There were canons that were established starting in the 4th Century with the Emperor Constantine.  F.F. Bruce's book The Canon of Scripture is a good book on this.

While I have seen many people say this (bolded part), I do not know that it's true or not. Do you have any scholarly references/sources?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Jetavan on January 06, 2013, 04:29:41 PM
I can't remember the last time I disagreed with something you said, but I might today...  :angel:

The 66 books that make up the Bible today, not counting the Apocrypha, were not put together into one group for some time.  There were canons that were established starting in the 4th Century with the Emperor Constantine.  F.F. Bruce's book The Canon of Scripture is a good book on this.

While I have seen many people say this (bolded part), I do not know that it's true or not. Do you have any scholarly references/sources?

The first list of "canonical" books (http://www.westarinstitute.org/Periodicals/4R_Articles/canon.html) that names the same twenty-seven writings found in our New Testament appears in the Easter letter of Athanasius , Bishop of Alexandria, Egypt, in 367 C.E. He names them in a different order, to be sure. Even so, the first list that agrees with ours was a long time in coming.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 04:32:39 PM
I'm not sure what that info has to do with St. Constantine  ???  :)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Jetavan on January 06, 2013, 04:35:31 PM
I'm not sure what that info has to do with St. Constantine  ???  :)
I read him as claiming not that Constantine defined the canon; only that that canon as we have it today, was formulated not too long after Constantine's rule.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 04:58:54 PM
Ahh, ok, I got ya :)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 05:44:20 PM
Eastern Catholicism has always boggled my mind.  The theological language which the Romans use often seems to contradict the Eastern understanding of the Faith, and many Roman Catholics today would not understand an Eastern or Oriental Catholic's point of view when it came to many of their cherished doctrines. 

You aren't the first person I have heard make this claim, and I have yet to be convinced that it is true. Rather than seeing them as in conflict, I see them as complementary.

I would love to talk more about how you see them as complimentary, as I've been seeking to reconcile them in my own mind as well.  Yet that would deserve a thread of its own...
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 06, 2013, 05:49:55 PM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

Neither of which should be called "religions".  Buddhism is very non-theistic, and atheism is a philosophy. 

I disagree, both, especially atheism are both religions. Dawkins practices the religion of atheism as an example.

I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

This is the same for me, I would not and could not leave Orthodoxy unless it was towards an absolute state of atheism. If the Christian God doesn't exist and Orthodoxy isn't try, then no other religion is true and no God exists.

Define "religion"?   I always understood religion to be involving worship of a god, or gods. Atheism is godless by definition, and seeks to worship nothing.

Religions isn't worship of a god or gods, though it sometimes involves that. Buddhism is a religion, modern Atheism is a religion. A visit to Wikipedia or Dictionary.com will show good definitions of religion.

I would say that a man like Neil Degrasse Tyson isn't religious, whereas a man like Richard Dawkins is highly religious. One is apathetic toward religion and even towards atheism, he's a scientist and doesn't care much for such debate; the other has dedicated his whole life and being towards atheism and furthering its philosophy, doctrine and membership using a lot of rhetoric similar to Protestant Fundamentalists.

Yes and I saw no definition which indicates atheism would be a religion.

".
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

Atheism is not about believing or not believing in anything.  Most atheists would much rather look at facts, and what can be proven rather than a personal set of beliefs.  That's closer to knowledge and understanding, not a matter of belief and faith.

I suppose you don't know any atheists then. May I introduce you to r/atheism? If you go there you'll see how atheism is a religion.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: JamesR on January 06, 2013, 06:02:20 PM

"buddhism" worships a "budda" and  "atheism" believes in nothingness, both false religions.

Buddhism doesn't "worship" a Buddha--at least not all Buddhism. Theravada Buddhism does not worship the Buddha, although, to be fair, the weird non-Indian forms of Buddhism do. As for atheism believing in "nothingness", that's quite a stretch. How exactly does lack of a belief in a God or gods constitute belief in nothingness? In fact, how is that even logically possible?

Quote
There can only be One True Religion and that is Christianity.

Why not Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, Sikhism, Jediism etc?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ebor on January 06, 2013, 06:37:43 PM
I'm not sure what that info has to do with St. Constantine  ???  :)
I read him as claiming not that Constantine defined the canon; only that that canon as we have it today, was formulated not too long after Constantine's rule.

That's correct. I wrote poorly in my using Constantine as a sort of marker of the period with his supporting Christianity with the State and calling councils such as Nicaea I in 325 and the listing of various combinations of books to be part of the canon that were written down.  It was my intent with this to give some historical context and that the Bible did not get handed down all in one piece from some indefinite time nor that the New Testament was all compiled and agreed on in the first century.

As to books along with Bruce's there's Bruce Metzger's
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-New-Testament-Development-Significance/dp/0198269544

I'm not providing the Amazon link to suggest buying it but to get the info on the book to people.
 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Jetavan on January 06, 2013, 07:02:10 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 07:06:06 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

Well, some of them do. Let's not lump all atheists together. IIRC, atheism simply means "lack of belief in a deity or deities". Nothing specifically about "reason" or "compassion" need go along with that. Some atheists are reasonable and compassionate, and some are jerks (just like Christians  ;D ).
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 06, 2013, 07:21:27 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

Or themselves as some also do.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 07:22:52 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

Under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, but actually under "atheism" would be right, which is scary, there goes "atheistic" reason and compassion.

if you disagree then please answer this question, what reason is there for rape to be wrong under "naturalism"/"atheism"?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 07:23:52 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

Under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, but actually under "atheism" would be right, which is scary, there goes "atheistic" reason and compassion.

if you disagree then please answer this question, what reason is there for rape to be wrong under "naturalism"/"atheism"?

Can you provide some factual evidence that the majority of convicted rapists are atheists? Because then this would actually be a legitimate question.

But to answer your question, if you really can't think of a good reason for rape to be wrong other than your religious beliefs, then please, by all means, don't let go of your religious beliefs. And either way, stay away from my house.  ::)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 07:25:02 PM
A lot of this has nothing whatsoever to do with atheism. As theistgal said, all atheism is is lacking belief in a god or gods. That's it.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 07:26:05 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

Under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, but actually under "atheism" would be right, which is scary, there goes "atheistic" reason and compassion.

if you disagree then please answer this question, what reason is there for rape to be wrong under "naturalism"/"atheism"?

Where do you get this garbage? I find it surprising that there really are people who are this poorly informed.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 07:27:51 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

Under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, but actually under "atheism" would be right, which is scary, there goes "atheistic" reason and compassion.

if you disagree then please answer this question, what reason is there for rape to be wrong under "naturalism"/"atheism"?

Where do you get this garbage? I find it surprising that there really are people who are this poorly informed.

ok then, answer the question.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 07:30:34 PM
Rape is wrong because it is the violation of my right to my own property: e.g., my physical body.

And it's also wrong because if you try it, you may wind up in the hospital for several weeks, if not the morgue permanently. So it's really a bad idea all around.  :police:
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 07:31:04 PM
SBC, you don't seem to understand what I said.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 07:31:36 PM
Can you provide some factual evidence that the majority of convicted rapists are atheists?

Who said a majority of "atheist" are rapist? you slanderer, I said under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, so if an "atheist" agrees that rape is wrong, they use Theistic Moral, aka General Real Morals.

Because then this would actually be a legitimate question.

But to answer your question,

 if you really can't think of a good reason for rape to be wrong other than your religious beliefs, then please, by all means, don't let go of your religious beliefs. And either way, stay away from my house.  ::)

Answer the question then if I am wrong, what reason under "atheism"(never said "atheist" are rapist, I said that there is no such thing as "atheistic" reason and compassion, any "atheist" who has reason and compassion uses Theistic Cognitive Logic)/ "naturalism" is rape wrong?
(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/Themes/Pascha2010/images/warnwarn.gif) You are warned for using an ad hominem and not respecting others. Please review our rules. If you wish to contest this warning, please PM me first. Carl Kraeff (Second Chance), Section Moderator
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 07:33:31 PM
Rape is wrong because it is the violation of my right to my own property: e.g., my physical body.

That's not explaining why it is wrong under "naturalism".

And it's also wrong because if you try it, you may wind up in the hospital for several weeks, if not the morgue permanently. So it's really a bad idea all around.  :police:

In other words you have no reason for it to be wrong under "naturalism", "naturalism" is therefore false.

so I ask again, what's the reason for rape being wrong under "naturalism", why is rape wrong under "naturalism"/"atheism"?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 07:36:05 PM
Can you provide some factual evidence that the majority of convicted rapists are atheists?

Who said a majority of "atheist" are rapist? you slanderer, I said under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, so if an "atheist" agrees that rape is wrong, they use Theistic Moral, aka General Real Morals.

Because then this would actually be a legitimate question.

But to answer your question,

 if you really can't think of a good reason for rape to be wrong other than your religious beliefs, then please, by all means, don't let go of your religious beliefs. And either way, stay away from my house.  ::)

Answer the question then if I am wrong, what reason under "atheism"(never said "atheist" are rapist, I said that there is no such thing as "atheistic" reason and compassion, any "atheist" who has reason and compassion uses Theistic Cognitive Logic)/ "naturalism" is rape wrong?

1. Please do not call me names.

2. There is no such thing as "atheism" as a specific philosophy/system of belief. "Atheism" is "the lack of belief in a god or gods". There are atheists who belong to religions such as Buddhism, which has its own ethical system. There are other atheists who follow the rules of whatever society they managed to land in.

3. Rape is wrong because forcing another person, against their will, to have sex with you is a violation of their rights under the law. If you actually need more of a reason than that, then please, stay home, far far away from the rest of civilization.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: truthseeker32 on January 06, 2013, 07:49:42 PM
I would love to talk more about how you see them as complimentary, as I've been seeking to reconcile them in my own mind as well.  Yet that would deserve a thread of its own...
Send me a PM. I'd be happy to discuss it.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 07:49:58 PM
Historically, most societies have had punishments of some kind against rapists and other criminals. It's one of the signs of being a civilized culture, that you have a system of laws and something done against violators of the law.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: SavedByChrist94 on January 06, 2013, 07:53:26 PM
Can you provide some factual evidence that the majority of convicted rapists are atheists?

Who said a majority of "atheist" are rapist? you slanderer, I said under "atheism" there is no reason for rape to be wrong, so if an "atheist" agrees that rape is wrong, they use Theistic Moral, aka General Real Morals.

Because then this would actually be a legitimate question.

But to answer your question,

 if you really can't think of a good reason for rape to be wrong other than your religious beliefs, then please, by all means, don't let go of your religious beliefs. And either way, stay away from my house.  ::)

Answer the question then if I am wrong, what reason under "atheism"(never said "atheist" are rapist, I said that there is no such thing as "atheistic" reason and compassion, any "atheist" who has reason and compassion uses Theistic Cognitive Logic)/ "naturalism" is rape wrong?

1. Please do not call me names.

2. There is no such thing as "atheism" as a specific philosophy/system of belief. "Atheism" is "the lack of belief in a god or gods". There are atheists who belong to religions such as Buddhism, which has its own ethical system. There are other atheists who follow the rules of whatever society they managed to land in.

3. Rape is wrong because forcing another person, against their will, to have sex with you is a violation of their rights under the law. If you actually need more of a reason than that, then please, stay home, far far away from the rest of civilization.

1, you claimed that I said that a "majority of "atheist are rapist", I didn't say that.

2, actually "lack of belief" is a philosophy, I can easily refute it with this question, what proof and evidence is there for a "lack of belief" to be accurate and correct?

3,That is the correct reason, but under "atheism" there wouldn't be a law, that's why "atheism" is fairy tales.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 07:57:14 PM
1, you claimed that I said that a "majority of "atheist are rapist", I didn't say that.

I did not say you said that. I am pointing out that unless the majority of convicted rapists are avowed atheists, it's pointless to ask whether "atheism" has anything to say about rape.

I'm not responding to the rest of what you wrote because frankly, you're temping me to the Sin of Impatiently Posting Too Quickly On The Internet.  8)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: JamesR on January 06, 2013, 08:06:08 PM
Atheism is not necessarily naturalism. It is indeed true that most western atheists are naturalistic in their worldview, but just because they are atheists--lack belief in a God or gods--it does not follow that they necessarily are naturalists--like many scientists. Indeed, I know many atheists that are actually very superstitious or "spiritual" people who dabble in the occult and the like. Even Buddhism itself--which is a religion--is technically atheistic--although they generally refer to be called "non-theistic--because the religion lacks any concept of a God or gods.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: J Michael on January 06, 2013, 08:06:25 PM
1, you claimed that I said that a "majority of "atheist are rapist", I didn't say that.

I did not say you said that. I am pointing out that unless the majority of convicted rapists are avowed atheists, it's pointless to ask whether "atheism" has anything to say about rape.

I'm not responding to the rest of what you wrote because frankly, you're temping me to the Sin of Impatiently Posting Too Quickly On The Internet.  8)

That's a sin?  Uh oh........ ;)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 08:28:10 PM
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 06, 2013, 09:04:21 PM
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)

^ I've always loved that image
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Andrew Crook on January 06, 2013, 09:07:36 PM
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)

LOLOLOL  :laugh: :laugh: :D :D, that's why I feel this whole argument started by SBC here has gotten rather pointless.. so it's no big deal to me anymore.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 09:11:00 PM
Here's another version I like:

(http://1389blog.com/pix/someone-is-wrong-on-the-internet-300x300.jpg)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Asteriktos on January 06, 2013, 09:35:11 PM
I'm not sure what that info has to do with St. Constantine  ???  :)
I read him as claiming not that Constantine defined the canon; only that that canon as we have it today, was formulated not too long after Constantine's rule.

That's correct. I wrote poorly in my using Constantine as a sort of marker of the period with his supporting Christianity with the State and calling councils such as Nicaea I in 325 and the listing of various combinations of books to be part of the canon that were written down.  It was my intent with this to give some historical context and that the Bible did not get handed down all in one piece from some indefinite time nor that the New Testament was all compiled and agreed on in the first century.

As to books along with Bruce's there's Bruce Metzger's
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-New-Testament-Development-Significance/dp/0198269544

I'm not providing the Amazon link to suggest buying it but to get the info on the book to people.
 

Thanks! :)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 06, 2013, 09:42:34 PM
Well, I've already failed today, so that's out of the way.

Now we can move on.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 06, 2013, 10:29:55 PM
Because I have taken my time in figuring things out, and have attempted to be meticulous in the process, I am confident that wherever I end up (likely Eastern Catholicism) will be for good.

Catholicism? I thought you were an Orthodox. unless i am mistaken.
No, I am not Orthodox. As I have said in other threads, I have studied Orthodoxy quite a bit and continue to study it, but in the end I found myself leaning towards Rome. That being said, I still have a great love for the Eastern Christian tradition, which is why I feel at home as an Eastern Catholic.


what does your priest think about this position of yours? is he ok with you being an easter catholic, rather than Roman Catholic? Or have you not told him?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 06, 2013, 10:50:29 PM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

buddhism I understand. But if you truly believe in God, then why would you become an atheist?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 06, 2013, 10:59:43 PM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.

although I believe in the resurrection of Jesus. I want you to prove it to me. Can you give me proof outside the world of religion. Give me historians talking about some guy who happenned to be raised from the dead, in jerusalem. and who have scientific evidence, to support it.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 06, 2013, 11:02:04 PM
what does your priest think about this position of yours? is he ok with you being an easter catholic, rather than Roman Catholic? Or have you not told him?

Er ... Eastern ("Easter") Catholics are part of the Roman Catholic Church, so I don't know why his priest wouldn't be OK with it.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: JamesR on January 06, 2013, 11:10:46 PM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

buddhism I understand. But if you truly believe in God, then why would you become an atheist?

The ultimate freedom to do whatever I want without having to worry about repercussions in the next life and guilt. If I ever converted to atheism, it would probably be more out of desire--my mind WANTING God to not exist so I could do what I want--opposed to actually believing that He doesn't exist.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 06, 2013, 11:16:15 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

shouldn't we christians do that instead? I mean. The true God, gave us a brain for a reason (shouldn't we use it?), and as for compassion, isn't that the duty of christians? yet everyone else does it better, and we only do better in theory.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 06, 2013, 11:30:59 PM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

shouldn't we christians do that instead? I mean. The true God, gave us a brain for a reason (shouldn't we use it?), and as for compassion, isn't that the duty of christians? yet everyone else does it better, and we only do better in theory.

Says you.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Jetavan on January 06, 2013, 11:40:19 PM
I am 1,000,000% sure that if I were to ever apostate from Orthodoxy, it wouldn't be for another Christian denomination. I am 1,000,000% sure that Orthodoxy is the real deal and the most reasonable Christianity. If I were to ever apostate, it would be to an entirely different religion--probably either Buddhism or atheism.

buddhism I understand. But if you truly believe in God, then why would you become an atheist?

The ultimate freedom to do whatever I want without having to worry about repercussions in the next life and guilt. If I ever converted to atheism, it would probably be more out of desire--my mind WANTING God to not exist so I could do what I want--opposed to actually believing that He doesn't exist.
What about repercussions in this life?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Aindriú on January 07, 2013, 08:16:32 AM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

shouldn't we christians do that instead? I mean. The true God, gave us a brain for a reason (shouldn't we use it?), and as for compassion, isn't that the duty of christians? yet everyone else does it better, and we only do better in theory.

Compassion probably wasn't the right word. But we give worship go to God, out of which springs forth love and compassion. This shouldn't be a rejection of reason, but it does place the priorities of reason. That is, we love people because of our faith, not because we reasoned it advantageous. We study the universe as a marvel of creation, not as an exercise of our ego.

God then sets the boundaries and focus in life, not what we determine from our own flawed reasoning with the lack of knowledge we receive confused with our emotions.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Jetavan on January 07, 2013, 09:49:16 AM
That is, we love people because of our faith, not because we reasoned it advantageous.
Shouldn't we love people because of both faith and reason?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ashman618 on January 07, 2013, 10:47:21 AM
"atheist" worship nothingness
The atheists I know worship ("give worth to") reason and compassion.

shouldn't we christians do that instead? I mean. The true God, gave us a brain for a reason (shouldn't we use it?), and as for compassion, isn't that the duty of christians? yet everyone else does it better, and we only do better in theory.

Is reason influenced by demonic powers and wisdom?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: simplygermain on January 07, 2013, 03:23:31 PM
Ah so now you get to determine what is a fact? So much more for the scientific method and all of the progress we've made...  ;)

Nope, Actually Science(Creation ex Nihilo, First Uncaused Cause, The Shroud, "macro-evolution" being a myth, Intelligent Design Fact, Mind-Body Dualism being a Fact/Mind is Immaterial), Philosophy("naturalism" is impossible, Morality), History(The Bible, Jesus Christ Resurrection being a Fact of Life), Logical(Ontological, God has to necessarily exist) determines what is Fact, and Science says that Factually, 100%, God(The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) exists and The Bible is The Objective Truth.

now, what proof and evidence is there against these Facts?

None.

although I believe in the resurrection of Jesus. I want you to prove it to me. Can you give me proof outside the world of religion. Give me historians talking about some guy who happenned to be raised from the dead, in jerusalem. and who have scientific evidence, to support it.
Tweety, not that I agree with SBC94's approach, theories or rants, but are you really unaware of these historians, or just pulling SBC'S chain?
I'm referring to Josephus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Eusebius, et al...
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: simplygermain on January 07, 2013, 03:25:06 PM
That is, we love people because of our faith, not because we reasoned it advantageous.
Shouldn't we love people because of both faith and reason?
One does not need (a) reason to love. Love can exist without reason.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: choy on January 07, 2013, 03:35:41 PM
Are you more than 1000% sure?

I have learned to never say never.  When I decided to become more serious with my faith I said that I will never be anything else than a Roman Catholic.  In 2010, because of my growing knowledge of the faith I said I wanted to visit Eastern Catholic Churches, which at that time I recently learned about, and learn more about them.  The moment I stepped onto a Ukrainian Catholic Church I wanted to become part of it.  In 2011, all I every want to become is Ukrainian Catholic.  And in 2012 I first stepped inside an Orthodox parish.  I even told the priest I am not looking to become Orthodox.  But here I am in 2013 about to be received as a catechumen in the OCA.

Am I Orthodox for life?  At this point I would want to, but given my journey I will just take everything day by day.  Who knows, maybe God wants me somewhere else at some point in the future.  So today I know that I want to be Orthodox.  As Scripture says, let tomorrow worry about tomorrow (paraphrasing here), so what will I be tomorrow I don't know and I don't want to worry about.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 07, 2013, 07:07:03 PM
Are you more than 1000% sure?

I have learned to never say never.  When I decided to become more serious with my faith I said that I will never be anything else than a Roman Catholic.  In 2010, because of my growing knowledge of the faith I said I wanted to visit Eastern Catholic Churches, which at that time I recently learned about, and learn more about them.  The moment I stepped onto a Ukrainian Catholic Church I wanted to become part of it.  In 2011, all I every want to become is Ukrainian Catholic.  And in 2012 I first stepped inside an Orthodox parish.  I even told the priest I am not looking to become Orthodox.  But here I am in 2013 about to be received as a catechumen in the OCA.

Am I Orthodox for life?  At this point I would want to, but given my journey I will just take everything day by day.  Who knows, maybe God wants me somewhere else at some point in the future.  So today I know that I want to be Orthodox.  As Scripture says, let tomorrow worry about tomorrow (paraphrasing here), so what will I be tomorrow I don't know and I don't want to worry about.

thank you for your meaningful response. I appreciate it.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Dominika on January 07, 2013, 07:53:17 PM
I hope I'll be Orthodox Christian for all the rest of my life becasue it's my home. I don't know what or who could convice me to leave the Orthodox Church.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: yeshuaisiam on January 08, 2013, 01:04:45 AM
I am 100% NOT SURE.

I can promise it will be some type of Christian.  Despite my arguments you never know I could rejoin Orthodoxy.   I'm in a lot of deep study, and do argue a lot... Lots of pain & questions.   So where I am at, where I was once in Orthodoxy, I can't ever say I would not change.

I COULD NOT go to a non-Christian faith or Atheism.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 08, 2013, 02:17:22 PM
To refute your opinions would involve presenting countering ideas and support for them. is that correct?  Will you address things that people write that disagree with you?  If so, can we narrow it down to one at a time to focus a bit more?

How about History?  You have the Bible under History in your paragraph.  Yes the Bible exists but what do you know about the history of the Bible?  It was written and compiled over many centuries.  It was also translated into different languages. It is made up of different sorts of writing including poetry, praise, instruction and historical accounts. 
What do you really know about the history of the Bible?  Do you have a particular translation that you prefer?  If so, do you know how it came to be made?

Having translation problems mean nothing, we have Alot of Manuscripts, The Bible is the most accurate Historical Document in Ancient History, http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Here is a link to a book on the history of the King James Version (which did include the Apocrypha by the way)  called "God's Secretaries"
http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Secretaries-Making-James-Bible/dp/0060838736

I am starting with this translation because it is widely known.

I don't care about The King James Version, we got The Manuscripts, King James is therefore not needed  in this debate,

The problem now is just folks don't know how to easily Translate things, for example the best Translation now would be The NIV, yet it has problems, for example, http://www.jasonstaples.com/blog/2009/most-misinterpreted-bible-passages-1-matthew-527-28-18

Also,, Jesus Christ Resurrection is a Fact,

Going through every "naturalistic" myth and will leave The Resurrection as The Only Explanation, not best or most probable but Only Explanation.

proving that Jesus Christ existed and there was an empty tomb factually follows that He rose from the dead.

myth theory -

Different points of views, no contradiction from The Apostles means events happened. miracles are authentic as they are written in witness and have evidence of addition, exaggeration, or lies.

Josephus proves Jesus Christ was crucified, no matter what you say this man was a Jew, had no biased or presupposition.

Nazareth Inscription proves empty tomb.

Women found the tomb empty, this irrefutable, criteria of embarrassment

Matthew 28:11-18 proves without a doubt there was an empty tomb, Matthew refutes the Jews, no matter what you say or what you think he REFUTES what the Jews were saying, which proves, the Jews were claiming they stole the tomb. a common presupposition and excuse.

My fellow Christians told the truth of The Resurrection and the Jews spread the stolen tomb myth, either way EMPTY TOMB, of who? Jesus Christ, why was there a tomb? He was crucified, why? because the Jews thought He committed blasphemy why was there an empty tomb? we will get to that next. Apostles died for their beliefs and appearances are genuine(will get to it next)

"myth theory" is long gone and dead. if you EVER claim myth then you are a presuppositional delusional hypocritical, the words could go on and on.

myth "theory" is now an impossible myth.


conspiracy theory - 1, No one could have stolen the tomb as it was blocked by roman guards.

2, Apostles had nothing to gain, criteria of embarrassment, they were shamed and were against all evil, sin.

3, They died for their beliefs, 11 of the 12 Apostles died for their beliefs, no one dies for a known lie, they really believed in The Resurrection added that with the facts of the appearances.

4, Appearances to Women, proves Apostles were telling the truth

5, James, the brother of Jesus Christ in The Gospels is a skeptic, outside of it he's a believer(Letters, Church, and Josephus) Jesus had to have appeared to him.

6, Paul, a prosecutor of Christians becomes a Christian himself and becomes a leading preacher of Christianity going through all kinds of suffering and ultimately death for his beliefs.

7, Apostles believed in The Resurrection despite every predispostion to the contrary, no one believed The Messiah was going to die, be God, or much less Resurrect from the dead. no one believed in The Resurrection until the end of world, the general Resurrection.

Apostles believed The Resurrection happened, myth and conspiracy theories are now myths, if you want to argue you can only use your last 3 "naturalistic" myths when arguing with me because the myth and conspiracy theories are dead myths now, using them or believing them exposes you as a hypocrite as those are now Impossible Explanations.


Now we have a few facts,

Jesus Christ was crucified
There was an Empty Tomb
Jesus Christ appeared alive after His death to several people
Apostles really believed in The Resurrection


last 3 which are easily refutatable.

"twin brother/lookalike" theory - Apostles knew Jesus, saw Him perform more miracles, Empty Tomb and no one could have stolen the tomb, had same wounds, no known twin brother as James, Jesus half brother, would take that into consideration. and theory is a stretch.

"twin brother/lookalike" theory is a myth

swoon theory - Apostles saw Jesus Christ die, He was anointed, stabbed in chest pouring blood and water confirming death, romans made sure you die when crucified, even if survived would have been impossible to escape tomb, would've died later, would not convince apostles, and Jesus Christ Ascended.

swoon theory is now a myth

last theory that if I disprove I prove The Resurrection happened.

hallucination theory - Apostles were in their right minds, died for their beliefs, hallucinations are fast and quick, Thomas for example put his hand in Jesus side, you don't have multiple hallucinations about the same thing, and finally multiple people do not hallucinate about the same thing.

EVERY Single "naturalistic" "theory" has been made a myth of.

There is one Irrefutable Explanation, not the best but The Only Explanation is that Jesus Christ died on the cross and Resurrected from the dead, therefore proving everything in The Bible as a fact.

Jesus Christ Resurrected from the dead.

add that with The Shroud which has no evidence of forgery, not a painting, cannot be reproduced with any type of technology, and caused by a burst of light from the dead body causing an image like a photography.

With The facts of The Bible's inerrancy and no contradiction, The Sense it makes, reliable Testimony/Accounts, Scientific Accuracy and foreknowledge, Historical Accuracy and foreknowledge, God's existence and failure of other religions making Christianity the only factual possibility, Physical evidence in The Shroud and Only Explanation being The Resurrection, it is indeniable, God Exists, Jesus Christ is Lord, Our Savior who died for our sins on the cross, Jesus Christ is the 2nd person of God, and that God is The Trinity of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.



So on history you've been refuted, pick another area now.


for those who believe indeed an empty tomb is a sign of resurrection. For  some others who are looking for reasons why they should except christ as the God. An empty tomb is not enough, because an empty tomb could be emptied by someone else who loved power and authority, and wanted to control the masses by making something appear as truth. So there is no proof. Scientifically at least. It is all a matter of what we believe (faith). And most of us believe what makes sense. And if jesus is the son of God, then yes resurrecting makes perfect sense, even if he never said that he would.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 08, 2013, 02:21:03 PM
I am 100% NOT SURE.

I can promise it will be some type of Christian.  Despite my arguments you never know I could rejoin Orthodoxy.   I'm in a lot of deep study, and do argue a lot... Lots of pain & questions.   So where I am at, where I was once in Orthodoxy, I can't ever say I would not change.

I COULD NOT go to a non-Christian faith or Atheism.

regarding the last sentence: if you believe in christ as the true God, it's the most probable that you can't become an atheist, or non christian. On the other hand, a doubt is what keeps me away from other religions, not a warm faith. Although christianity makes more sense because, it seems to be the only one that recognizes and cares about our human rights. And doesn't consider us a big nothing.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 08, 2013, 02:25:12 PM
That is, we love people because of our faith, not because we reasoned it advantageous.
Shouldn't we love people because of both faith and reason?
One does not need (a) reason to love. Love can exist without reason.

Indeed.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: zoarthegleaner on January 08, 2013, 10:16:27 PM
I don't believe an Orthodox Christian can change denomination being a Christian without leaving the Church, and if he or she did, why would it matter?


John
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Tikhon.of.Colorado on January 08, 2013, 10:24:46 PM
Even the most confident have a chance, you know. :)

I think it all depends on one's attitude.  I was in the Orthodox Church for two years, and I was very immature.  I focused on the unimportant and even superficial aspects of the Orthodox Church, and I ended up leaving the Church for another denomination (though I've not made any effort to enter this denomination, and will not.)

If you are in the Orthodox Church and love it for the firm faith rooted in tradition, and can look past the fancy bells and whistles, into the deeper meaning within the liturgy, than you've got a fighting chance. 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 08, 2013, 11:00:17 PM
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)

 :laugh: I love xkcd!
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 09, 2013, 02:06:13 PM
Even the most confident have a chance, you know. :)

I think it all depends on one's attitude.  I was in the Orthodox Church for two years, and I was very immature.  I focused on the unimportant and even superficial aspects of the Orthodox Church, and I ended up leaving the Church for another denomination (though I've not made any effort to enter this denomination, and will not.)

If you are in the Orthodox Church and love it for the firm faith rooted in tradition, and can look past the fancy bells and whistles, into the deeper meaning within the liturgy, than you've got a fighting chance. 

what do you consider the unimportant and superficial aspects?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: LizaSymonenko on January 09, 2013, 03:02:14 PM
Are you more than 1000% sure?

More than 1,000,000% sure.

Orthodoxy or death.

In truth, without Christ, I am nothing....and I believe wholeheartedly that the Orthodox Faith is His One True Church.

Every moment of my day revolves around my Faith.  Every thing I do, how I do it, why I do it....all revolves around Orthodoxy.

I am blessed to be born in to a family who has been Orthodox for generations.  I feel each of my ancestors behind me.  When I pray...they all pray with me.  At the Eucharist, we all stand together before God.  We pray for them, they pray for us.

To take Orthodoxy from me, would be like sucking the air from my lungs.

I would die.

Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on January 09, 2013, 03:27:20 PM
As sure as I am of my own existence.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 09, 2013, 07:24:42 PM
As sure as I am of my own existence.

how sure are you about that? I think therefore I am won't do it.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Tikhon.of.Colorado on January 09, 2013, 07:55:54 PM
Even the most confident have a chance, you know. :)

I think it all depends on one's attitude.  I was in the Orthodox Church for two years, and I was very immature.  I focused on the unimportant and even superficial aspects of the Orthodox Church, and I ended up leaving the Church for another denomination (though I've not made any effort to enter this denomination, and will not.)

If you are in the Orthodox Church and love it for the firm faith rooted in tradition, and can look past the fancy bells and whistles, into the deeper meaning within the liturgy, than you've got a fighting chance. 

what do you consider the unimportant and superficial aspects?

Just things like a Church's ethnic identity, which is all well and fine, but doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the Orthodox Faith.  (Speaking from the American Orthodox perspective, that is, where my town has a Russian Church down the street from a Greek one.)
what do you consider the unimportant and superficial aspects?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on January 10, 2013, 08:19:29 AM
As sure as I am of my own existence.

how sure are you about that? I think therefore I am won't do it.

That's your problem.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 10, 2013, 09:06:06 AM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 10, 2013, 09:06:48 AM
Are you more than 1000% sure?

I am no longer part of a denomination.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 10, 2013, 09:08:30 AM


I agree with the hot chick. This gender confusion needs to stop.

Wrong thread. ;D
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: LizaSymonenko on January 10, 2013, 10:08:41 AM

I thought perhaps you were starting a new denomination.   ;D
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: IoanC on January 10, 2013, 11:15:13 AM
Orthodoxy for me is not a denomination, but a way of life, the way of life; it is true human nature. As for how sure I am that I will not change, I will say that it has to do with God's help for me, and I have faith that He will keep me in The Faith.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 10, 2013, 01:04:49 PM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.

so if you decide to change it you will make your own?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: choy on January 10, 2013, 01:56:43 PM
To take Orthodoxy from me, would be like sucking the air from my lungs.

I would die.



I said the same about Catholicism not too long ago.  But its not like I'm open to becoming Evangelical or Pentecostal.  Who knows, maybe in 10 years I'll be Coptic  ;D
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 10, 2013, 07:26:41 PM
To take Orthodoxy from me, would be like sucking the air from my lungs.

I would die.



I said the same about Catholicism not too long ago.  But its not like I'm open to becoming Evangelical or Pentecostal.  Who knows, maybe in 10 years I'll be Coptic  ;D

what is a coptic?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: LizaSymonenko on January 10, 2013, 07:29:52 PM

Coptic Orthodox
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 10, 2013, 07:51:56 PM

Coptic Orthodox


are they a different denomination? and what is the difference between them and the EO?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: choy on January 10, 2013, 08:18:08 PM

Coptic Orthodox


are they a different denomination? and what is the difference between them and the EO?

They did not accept the council of Chalcedon.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: OrthoNoob on January 10, 2013, 08:42:04 PM
As sure as I am of my own existence.

how sure are you about that? I think therefore I am won't do it.

You can't arbitrarily dismiss airtight logical arguments on the basis of the same enlightened progressive attitude that you seem to think exempts you from the rules of capitalization and punctuation that bind lesser mortals.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: LizaSymonenko on January 10, 2013, 08:48:08 PM

Coptic Orthodox


are they a different denomination? and what is the difference between them and the EO?

You do realize that Orthodoxy is not a "denomination", right?

The Orthodox Church is the One True Church of Christ.

Denominations have branched off from Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 10, 2013, 09:06:43 PM

Coptic Orthodox


are they a different denomination? and what is the difference between them and the EO?

You do realize that Orthodoxy is not a "denomination", right?

The Orthodox Church is the One True Church of Christ.

Denominations have branched off from Orthodoxy.





To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus.
and second of all, you didn't answer about the coptics. What are they? and what is the difference  between them and the E0.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: choy on January 10, 2013, 09:09:23 PM

To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus.
and second of all, you didn't answer about the coptics. What are they? and what is the difference  between them and the E0.

I already answered.  They did not accept the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: JamesR on January 10, 2013, 09:11:54 PM
To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus.
and second of all, you didn't answer about the coptics. What are they? and what is the difference  between them and the E0.

Which Jesus? Just because someone says they believe in Jesus does not mean that they really worship Jesus, but rather worship their own idol of what they imagine Jesus is like in their mind. This is why doctrine, dogma and apostolic succession are so important. If they do not adhere to the traditions that the Apostles passed down to us (2 Thess. 2:15) then they do not worship the real Jesus but an idol of Jesus.

*flamesuit on* As to your Coptic question, that's a controversial one. Being honest, they are a group of heretics who broke away from the Church by rejecting the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. Many disagree though...It's more confusing than that.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: choy on January 10, 2013, 09:18:00 PM
To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus.
and second of all, you didn't answer about the coptics. What are they? and what is the difference  between them and the E0.

Which Jesus? Just because someone says they believe in Jesus does not mean that they really worship Jesus, but rather worship their own idol of what they imagine Jesus is like in their mind. This is why doctrine, dogma and apostolic succession are so important. If they do not adhere to the traditions that the Apostles passed down to us (2 Thess. 2:15) then they do not worship the real Jesus but an idol of Jesus.

*flamesuit on* As to your Coptic question, that's a controversial one. Being honest, they are a group of heretics who broke away from the Church by rejecting the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. Many disagree though...It's more confusing than that.

Did we just listen to the same podcast on Ancient Faith Radio?  ;)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 10, 2013, 10:04:17 PM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.

so if you decide to change it you will make your own?
But what if I don't change?

I left all that stuff behind.  I won't return.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 10, 2013, 10:06:27 PM

Coptic Orthodox


are they a different denomination? and what is the difference between them and the EO?

You do realize that Orthodoxy is not a "denomination", right?

The Orthodox Church is the One True Church of Christ.

Denominations have branched off from Orthodoxy.





To me it's the same.
And you are incorrect.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: simplygermain on January 11, 2013, 03:56:43 AM
Tweety234 said...
"To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus."


How is it possibly the same? Same what, faith? Please enlighten us on how, exactly.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Basil 320 on January 11, 2013, 05:05:02 AM
"They all believe in Jesus."  It's not that simple, who is Jesus?

The Coptic Orthodox Church along with other so called Oriental Orthodox Churches--Armenian Apostolic, Syrian Orthodox, do not accept the statement of faith promulgated by 4th Ecumenical Synod which met at Chalcedon in 451, which became dogma to the Holy Eastern Orthodox Christian Church (along with the Roman Catholic Church which were united as the "Undivided Church of Christ" at the time): That there are two perfect natures in the Person of Christ unified "unconfusedly, indivisibly, and inseparably."
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: JamesR on January 11, 2013, 05:11:48 AM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Arachne on January 11, 2013, 05:31:31 AM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.

Which are not even universally accepted doctrine. ::)
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: simplygermain on January 11, 2013, 11:58:18 AM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.
Ah, James, James, James.
You need to have a phone visit with a good Palestinian priest. I know it put my mind at ease. All those armchair orthodox in the Fr. Seraphim Fan Club have truly made a cult out of the tollhouses.
Find me unanimous sources before 400AD, or even a mere seven fathers who support this theory and then worry. The scripture speaks of two judgements.... A personal one and the final one. Beyond that, everything is speculation and man's own supposed revelations. Many, I repeat, MANY orthodox, including those native to Syria, Palestine and Jerusalem hold no such dogma.

Rest in the knowledge of this. Don't be concerned with it. Keep your mind focused on Christ and on getting up every time you fall down. Learning how to take a spiritual punch in the mouth is your first step in the martyrdom that our Lord asks of us.

After a while you will see that it gets easier and your natural desire to love God by saying no to the flesh will overcome your base desires to say yes all the time.

I hope you have a good spiritual father. If not, get one QUICKLY!
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 11, 2013, 02:22:40 PM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.

so if you decide to change it you will make your own?
But what if I don't change?

I left all that stuff behind.  I won't return.


you don't have to change. You shouldn't have to anyway. But what makes you so certain that you won't, is what I am curious about.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 11, 2013, 02:23:49 PM
Tweety234 said...
"To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus."


How is it possibly the same? Same what, faith? Please enlighten us on how, exactly.

They all believe in Jesus as a saviour.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 11, 2013, 02:30:20 PM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.

Where in the Bible is Jesus talking about tollhouses. If he does and no one told you upfront, then you are indeed backstabed. However, if he doesn't say such thing in the bible, rest assured that you have not been backstabed. Not by Jesus at least. And if Jesus has not backstabed you, who will dare to do that to you, without consequences?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: choy on January 11, 2013, 03:09:29 PM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.

So you are going to apostatize on something that is not dogmatic or doctrinal, that a lot of theologians and monks themselves do not accept and refute?

http://new-ostrog.org/discussion-on-the-toll-houses
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Monk Vasyl on January 11, 2013, 03:27:44 PM
I left the Catholic Church to become Orthodox and I will die Orthodox.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Wyatt on January 11, 2013, 03:29:57 PM
I was done with denominationalism in 2007
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 11, 2013, 03:59:08 PM
I was done with denominationalism in 2007

and what drew you to catholicism rather than Orthodoxy?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 11, 2013, 04:07:00 PM
Tweety234 said...
"To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus."


How is it possibly the same? Same what, faith? Please enlighten us on how, exactly.

They all believe in Jesus as a saviour.

So did the Arians.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Ashman618 on January 11, 2013, 06:20:13 PM
Tweety234 said...
"To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus."


How is it possibly the same? Same what, faith? Please enlighten us on how, exactly.

They all believe in Jesus as a saviour.

So did the Arians.

Tweety what's your opinion on the Arians?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: biro on January 11, 2013, 06:25:20 PM
Tweety234 said...
"To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus."


How is it possibly the same? Same what, faith? Please enlighten us on how, exactly.

They all believe in Jesus as a saviour.

So did the Arians.

Tweety what's your opinion on the Arians?

Don't encourage him.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Cyrillic on January 11, 2013, 06:27:30 PM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.

Where in the Bible is Jesus talking about tollhouses. If he does and no one told you upfront, then you are indeed backstabed. However, if he doesn't say such thing in the bible, rest assured that you have not been backstabed. Not by Jesus at least. And if Jesus has not backstabed you, who will dare to do that to you, without consequences?

Sola Scriptura?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on January 11, 2013, 06:30:33 PM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.

Are you sure that this is the reason and not your desire to free yourselves from God so that you can satisfy your self-admitted great carnal appetites?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 11, 2013, 06:55:27 PM
On second thought, I might actually apostatize because I feel highly shattered and backstabbed after reading about the tollhouses.

Where in the Bible is Jesus talking about tollhouses. If he does and no one told you upfront, then you are indeed backstabed. However, if he doesn't say such thing in the bible, rest assured that you have not been backstabed. Not by Jesus at least. And if Jesus has not backstabed you, who will dare to do that to you, without consequences?

Sola Scriptura?

sola scriptura? who me? No. I tend to like it more though.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 11, 2013, 11:24:28 PM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.

so if you decide to change it you will make your own?
But what if I don't change?

I left all that stuff behind.  I won't return.


you don't have to change. You shouldn't have to anyway. But what makes you so certain that you won't, is what I am curious about.

Why?  Is this one of those, "If you have to choose your wife or your kid, which one would it be" scenarios?
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 12, 2013, 11:41:45 AM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.

so if you decide to change it you will make your own?
But what if I don't change?

I left all that stuff behind.  I won't return.


you don't have to change. You shouldn't have to anyway. But what makes you so certain that you won't, is what I am curious about.

Why?  Is this one of those, "If you have to choose your wife or your kid, which one would it be" scenarios?


well, answer that.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: theistgal on January 12, 2013, 04:40:48 PM
That's not a fair question because there's really no correct answer. In a situation like that IN REAL LIFE, you save whoever you're able to save and that's the best you can do.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 12, 2013, 06:28:22 PM
That's not a fair question because there's really no correct answer. In a situation like that IN REAL LIFE, you save whoever you're able to save and that's the best you can do.

Indeed. But I would give priority to my child though.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Wyatt on January 12, 2013, 06:30:40 PM
I was done with denominationalism in 2007

and what drew you to catholicism rather than Orthodoxy?
I'd like to think that it was the Holy Spirit. That said, there are times when I feel drawn to the Orthodox Church. Right now I am a bit mixed up. I know that I'm done with Protestantism though, so I am better off than I was.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Kerdy on January 12, 2013, 09:01:36 PM
Quote
how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?


Why change it when you can start a new one?

Denominations.  Making new ones since the 16th century.

so if you decide to change it you will make your own?
But what if I don't change?

I left all that stuff behind.  I won't return.


you don't have to change. You shouldn't have to anyway. But what makes you so certain that you won't, is what I am curious about.

Why?  Is this one of those, "If you have to choose your wife or your kid, which one would it be" scenarios?


well, answer that.
I had a feeling.  I'm not into games, so I believe I'll pass on the opportunity to play.  But thank you for the invitation.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on January 12, 2013, 09:18:05 PM
Tweety234 said...
"To me it's the same. They all believe in Jesus."


How is it possibly the same? Same what, faith? Please enlighten us on how, exactly.

They all believe in Jesus as a saviour.

So did the Arians.

Tweety what's your opinion on the Arians?


Share a piece of their theory and I will tell you.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: tweety234 on February 02, 2013, 01:23:31 PM
"They all believe in Jesus."  It's not that simple, who is Jesus?

The Coptic Orthodox Church along with other so called Oriental Orthodox Churches--Armenian Apostolic, Syrian Orthodox, do not accept the statement of faith promulgated by 4th Ecumenical Synod which met at Chalcedon in 451, which became dogma to the Holy Eastern Orthodox Christian Church (along with the Roman Catholic Church which were united as the "Undivided Church of Christ" at the time): That there are two perfect natures in the Person of Christ unified "unconfusedly, indivisibly, and inseparably."

Who is jesus?  simple.

He is the man who was crucified by idiots (jews) who love their religion and prefer it to the living God who is the father of jesus. Jesus also is the man who was raised by his father from the dead, which is why we (humans) have hope of being raised and take part in his heavenly kingdom. That is who jesus is.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: orthonorm on February 02, 2013, 01:30:51 PM
I've been to hoping the change the El Bethel denomination up the street. Trying to get them to just Bethel. Looks weird to my terrible understanding of Hebrew and worse to my just slightly better understanding of Spanish.




Yes, I know some witnesses of Genesis 35:7 include this oddity.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Romaios on February 02, 2013, 02:11:09 PM
I've been to hoping the change the El Bethel denomination up the street. Trying to get them to just Bethel. Looks weird to my terrible understanding of Hebrew and worse to my just slightly better understanding of Spanish.

Lol - maybe they'll switch to "La Bethel" (cf. La casa de Dios).  :laugh:

Bayit is masculine, though.

El bethel would be "the god of Bethel", meaning the deity worshiped at that particular Canaanite sanctuary/altar.

This is what you get when people name their post-modern church after pre-Christian (pre-Yahwist even) sanctuaries! 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Alveus Lacuna on February 02, 2013, 04:44:49 PM
Well, I suppose it would be within the realm of possibility that I could be persuaded away from Christianity or just lose faith. I have heard others say that we decide to be a Christian every day, and that seems true to me.

I can say with some confidence that I would never become a Protestant again if I remained a faithful Christian all of my days. But I could perhaps be argued into Oriental Orthodoxy because of my admitted lack of knowledge concerning the Christological controversies surrounding the split. I could also be argued into Roman Catholicism if the primary sources were tilted heavier into the direction of current papal claims.

But Eastern Orthodoxy seems more universal to me than Oriental Orthodoxy and more accessible at this point in history, plus I am really heavily invested into the "Byzantine" theological perspective: theosis, silence, etc. And Roman Catholicism seems like a sinking ship to me, no offense to the Catholics around.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: J Michael on February 04, 2013, 02:44:38 PM
"They all believe in Jesus."  It's not that simple, who is Jesus?

The Coptic Orthodox Church along with other so called Oriental Orthodox Churches--Armenian Apostolic, Syrian Orthodox, do not accept the statement of faith promulgated by 4th Ecumenical Synod which met at Chalcedon in 451, which became dogma to the Holy Eastern Orthodox Christian Church (along with the Roman Catholic Church which were united as the "Undivided Church of Christ" at the time): That there are two perfect natures in the Person of Christ unified "unconfusedly, indivisibly, and inseparably."

Who is jesus?  simple.

He is the man who was crucified by idiots (jews) who love their religion and prefer it to the living God who is the father of jesus. Jesus also is the man who was raised by his father from the dead, which is why we (humans) have hope of being raised and take part in his heavenly kingdom. That is who jesus is.

If I recall correctly, Jesus was crucified by pagan Romans, at the insistence of particular group of Jews.  I also remember hearing from both Catholic and Orthodox priests that every time we sin we actively participate in His crucifixion. 
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Deep Roots on February 04, 2013, 03:19:02 PM

He is the man who was crucified by idiots (jews) who love their religion and prefer it to the living God who is the father of jesus. Jesus also is the man who was raised by his father from the dead, which is why we (humans) have hope of being raised and take part in his heavenly kingdom. That is who jesus is.
it may have been intentional; it may not have been; nonetheless I find the following juxtaposition very interesting:  "idiots (jews)"/"we (humans)".

i certainly hope the linguistic combination does not betray some sort of underlying way of thinking on your part.
Title: Re: how sure are you that you will never change a denomination?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on February 04, 2013, 04:29:39 PM
"They all believe in Jesus."  It's not that simple, who is Jesus?

The Coptic Orthodox Church along with other so called Oriental Orthodox Churches--Armenian Apostolic, Syrian Orthodox, do not accept the statement of faith promulgated by 4th Ecumenical Synod which met at Chalcedon in 451, which became dogma to the Holy Eastern Orthodox Christian Church (along with the Roman Catholic Church which were united as the "Undivided Church of Christ" at the time): That there are two perfect natures in the Person of Christ unified "unconfusedly, indivisibly, and inseparably."

Who is jesus?  simple.

He is the man who was crucified by idiots (jews) who love their religion and prefer it to the living God who is the father of jesus. Jesus also is the man who was raised by his father from the dead, which is why we (humans) have hope of being raised and take part in his heavenly kingdom. That is who jesus is.

I am going to say it slightly differently than JMichael above. The Lord was crucified by the Romans at the insistence of the Jews. The Jews that the Bible refers to are not the entire Jewish race but a part. Nonetheless, these facts pale in comparison to the fact that the Lord was persecuted by part of God's chosen people and crucified by the Romans, who were at that time the masters of the known world. The point is that humanity, as represented by two such sterling examples, crucified the Lord, fully man but also fully God. The point is that you and I if we had been as favored by God as the Jews and the Romans, would have done the same thing. We are all idiots in a most profound sense and figuratively hurt Him all the time. I was reading a saint who said something to the effect that God is not just; He is just loving, for if He were truly just, the race of man would not exist.