OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 12:21:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How can Eastern Orthodoxy be "the one true church"?  (Read 3172 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 2,818



WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2011, 03:58:41 PM »

There is no proof of use an iconostasis.

There is and it has been presented here. Grow up and stop trolling.

Quote
No proof of an antimension.
No proof of icon veneration.
No proof of blessing objects such as clothing
No proof of the use of a discos
No proof in the use of censors

There is and it has been presented here. Grow up and stop trolling.


Now, that hadn't been commented before.
Quote
No proof in crossing themselves

"In all our travels and movements in all our coming in and going out, in putting of our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupieth us, we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross".
Tertullian (De cor. Mil., iii)

2 And I saw another angel ascending from the rising of the sun, having the sign of the living God. And he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, 3 saying: Hurt not the earth nor the sea nor the trees, till we sign the servants of our God in their foreheads.
Revelation 7

4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth nor any green thing nor any tree: but only the men who have not the sign of God on their foreheads.
Revelation 9

Quote
So, would you like to stay on the subject?

Sure. Bring more blatant confessions of lack of the minimum studies to have any legitimate right to even open your mouth (or type anything) about a subject. It's like receiving the ball to just score with no goalkeeper to stop it. In fact, since it's fasting period, I should contain myself. This is far too good.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 04:00:20 PM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,234


« Reply #46 on: August 03, 2011, 04:09:54 PM »

How can it really be the one true church when so many other faiths say they are the one true church?

1) So many of the practices of worship are different than the early Christians

It is written that we are to worship God "in grace and truth". Nothing in there about freezing worship practices for two millenia. Having said that, I think it's absolutely remarkable how much things haven't changed when it comes to the essential elements. If particulars change... *shrugs*

Quote
2) So many schisms, break offs, and "heretics", "heresies", (of course they are "heresies" right?)

I also struggle with this, specifically why things seemed to start getting bad right away. We don't even get out of the Biblical writings and already there are divisions and problems. Such is what happens when humans are involved... in anything...

Quote
3) Great Schism - Who is right again, the patriarch or patriarch?

You really aren't at this fork in the road yet, are you? You're still 10 miles back. Deal with this problem when you get to it.  Smiley

Thanks for your considerate non rude or loaded response.   Smiley

1. Agreed that many fundamentals are the same, particulars vary greatly.
2. It is a struggle.  I do believe many fail to recognize this. For instance Origen is considered a "heretic".
3. You are right, the G. Schism is so far off.   But still part of the point 1 billion RC's, 350 million EO...  Who is right?

True, eventually decisions have to be made, and the waters are muddy. Let me ask you a couple things though. First, consistent reading of the New Testament wasn't around in the first century. Or, at best, maybe a collection of Paul's epistles were circulated, and a Church here and there might have a Gospel, but generally there wasn't any consistency in New Testament readings. For the first 20 years of Christianity there wasn't even the possibility of that. But eventually Christians across the Roman world came to recognize Paul's epistles, the four canonical Gospels, etc. Just because St. James in Jerusalem (for example) didn't read from the four Gospels in worship, does that mean that we can't innovate a bit? Isn't there some room for the Holy Spirit to guide the body of Christ, after the time of the Apostles, into new expressions/ways of worshipping?

Also, can we really reconstruct what worship was like based only on very early documents? Take the concept of preaching a sermon as one excample. Are we sure there was a sermon, or always a sermon, at every time of worship? Was it an examination or commentary of a particular biblical passage, or a discussion of the more general ideas? Were various languages and manuscript traditions discussed, or was particular ones faithfully followed? Were the insights of people (e.g. early disciples) used to help illuminate the meaning of the passage? Were allegorical or literal interpretations favored, or both used, or something else? Did the sermon focus on things to buttress the Christians in their faith, or on teaching them something they may not have known, or to motivate them to do good works, etc?  I guess what I'm saying is, a lot that went on we just don't know about, and we'd have to guess at if we really wanted to do it just like they did in the early Church.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #47 on: August 03, 2011, 04:32:13 PM »

Spectrum of light eh?

I guess Buddha had those too, because the "aura" is all over it.


Their spectrum of light appears to doesn't it?
"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." II Cor. 11:14.

Duh.

Justin Martyr, Polycarp were not protestants.  But their worship was nothing like Eastern Orthodox worship.
 
here you have completely exposed your ignorance: the DL is recognizeable from St. Justin Martyr's description of it.  But since you don't speak for the One True Church, and have adopted Protestant notions of worship-in particular their insistence on what worship is not while suffering under the inability to say what worship is-we have to take your failure to even offer a notion of what you think their worship was like as the admission that you have no idea.

So as the question remains,
I know you can't hear us.


how can it call itself the "one true church" if it is nothing like early Christianity.
How can you say you are the same person as the one in your baby picture, when you don't wear diapers, assUming you don't wear diapers.

It is the One True Church because it was the Church of the Early Christianity of Christ and His Apostles and the one they founders.  That it doesn't sit your incoherent hallucinations of what you think the Early Church should have been like bears no relevance.

Either that or take 1 mitre, 1 antimension, and call me lame.
You're lame, but since, unlike you, I can't self consecrate myself into Apostolic succession nor arrogate an antimension to myself, nor can you grant either, I'll follow the mitre and antimension that has been handed down by those the Apostles have entrusted.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 04:35:46 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
MyMapleStory
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Approaching Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: Will probably be Greek
Posts: 181


« Reply #48 on: August 03, 2011, 04:42:15 PM »

I cannot help but see the irony in that Yeshua demands the Orthodox completely show their worship as being from the first century, Yet I am sure for his church communion (or whatever he wants to call it) he could not do the same thing, while I would say it is true the form of the first century was different from the form in later centuries I think somethings have be taken into account, such as the persecution of the church and other things. And even then the Orthodox still come out with a tradition of worship which more accurately represents the worship of the apostles than any other church.

At least in my opinion.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #49 on: August 03, 2011, 05:01:54 PM »

1) The absence of evidence isn't evidence. You're essentially asking us to come up with a perfectly preserved worship scene from over 2,000 years ago from a group that was persecuted and generally on the move. Such a request is beyond absurd.

2) They continue to shift and change. That is what is meant by "die off." Even Mormonism has changed. The one truth about heresies is their doctrines will always change.

3) The Church Fathers actually date from the foundation of the Church all the way up to about the 8th to 9th century. Sts. Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Ignatius, and others all wrote, learned, and served in the first century (or early to second century). All three of them personally knew some of the Apostles. So it's highly disingenuous, or at least ill-informed, to say that the Fathers existed "225 years after first century Christians." That's simply not true.

1) I disagree.  There should be some evidence.
There is.

You haven't made it go away.

The fact is the worship scene was nothing in comparison with anything in the Eastern Orthodox Church today.
 
You keep on asserting that but you a) haven't demonstrated it, b) haven't even made a proposal of what figment of your imagination Orthodox worship is supposed to be compared to.

To call this absurd is wrong.
You're wrong.  And being absurd. Do you have any idea the difficulty in reconstructing, for instance, the worship of the 1st century Romans, a cult which had a whole imperial state to back it up at the time?  No, it seems you don't.

2) As the Eastern Orthodox church has changed.  Even members here on this board say it has "evolved", and by mere nature, evolution involves mutations.
Are you still a zygote in the womb?  Christianity has been a religion of history ever since before Christ was born "in the days of Caesar Augustus."  Why you think the Church should ignore the last two thousand years of its history you haven't explained.

3) I was referencing the Council of Nicea, when so much changed.'
Like what?  Because all those things you object to can be definitely shown before Nicea as well as after.

The early Christians such as Polycarp, Ignatius, Tertullian, and Justin Martyr did not worship as the Eastern Orthodox at all.
They say differently.

My question still remains.
on its head.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #50 on: August 03, 2011, 05:12:50 PM »

By the way, you don't want to go there with the Anabaptists.  
Yeshua said "you will know them by their fruits".

Let's start comparing the divorce rate of Anabaptists vs. Eastern Orthodox and the EO church will be in trouble very quickly.
You really don't know what you are talking about.  According to the SUNY study done in the 90's, the Orthodox had the lowest rate of divorce (<7%).  The baptist divorce rate is higher then the extremely high American average.
http://www.baptiststandard.com/2000/1_12/pages/divorce.html

So, your assertion that "the EO church will be in trouble very quickly" is just on a par with your other "facts"
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #51 on: August 03, 2011, 05:21:54 PM »

So as much as you'd like to believe they are heretical, they aren't bending over venerating wood.
That's one indication that they are heretics:"God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ" Gal. 6:14, St. Paul, Early Christian of the 1st century.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,497



« Reply #52 on: August 03, 2011, 05:40:12 PM »

How can it really be the one true church when so many other faiths say they are the one true church?

1) So many of the practices of worship are different than the early Christians
2) So many schisms, break offs, and "heretics", "heresies", (of course they are "heresies" right?)
3) Great Schism - Who is right again, the patriarch or patriarch?

So why is Eastern Orthodoxy with so many changes of the original worship of the original Christians the correct way to worship?

yeshuaisiam--You have been provided with many answers to your questions. You have yet to back up your assertions contained in points 1 through 3 above. It is time to come to a reasonable end to yet another pointless discussion started by you. In case you have not noticed, this is not soap box but a forum. Therefore, I will cut this thing off in three days before the dead horse is flogged many more times, unless you start getting serious about this. Thanks, Second Chance
« Last Edit: August 03, 2011, 05:41:25 PM by Second Chance » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #53 on: August 04, 2011, 10:05:10 AM »

By the way, you don't want to go there with the Anabaptists.  
Yeshua said "you will know them by their fruits".

Let's start comparing the divorce rate of Anabaptists vs. Eastern Orthodox and the EO church will be in trouble very quickly.
You really don't know what you are talking about.  According to the SUNY study done in the 90's, the Orthodox had the lowest rate of divorce (<7%).  The baptist divorce rate is higher then the extremely high American average.
http://www.baptiststandard.com/2000/1_12/pages/divorce.html

So, your assertion that "the EO church will be in trouble very quickly" is just on a par with your other "facts"

Not supporting the O.P. at all, but should point out before he does: Baptists and Anabaptists are not the same groups.
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.083 seconds with 36 queries.