Orthodox Church is only true Church founded by Jesus and His disciple in A.D 33?

[Green_Umbrella]

What kind of evidence are you looking for?

Catholic Church and Protestant Church also claim that they are the only true Church in this world.THeir teaching/Doctrine is also 100% correct.

Why would you think that only the teaching of Orthodox Church must be 100% correct while Catholic and Protestant must be 100% incorrect?

I do not think any protestant church can show apostolic succession. I do not even think they try do they? I have not seen any. The Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox can show apostolic succession. So ¨the church¨ is either one of them or both.

The reason apostolic succession is important is because in this unbroken chain is supposed the pure teaching and authority of the Christ. Unless you want to say something like ¨the church¨ is the ¨true believers¨ or those who really love Jesus or something like that. I guess that would be a protestant position.    

Now someone will come along and correct all I said but that is my understanding right now.

[walter1234]

Roman and protestant doctrines are correct insofar as they are the same as those of Orthodoxy, so I would never say that they're wrong in everything.

What is the difference between Orthodoxy and Protestant/Catholic and make you choose the Orthodoxy faith rather than Catholic or Protestant faith?

[PeterTheAleut]

Greetings, all. I recognize that Green_Umbrella's words have offended a few of you here, but he asks some hard questions to which we Orthodox would do well to give well-reasoned, articulate answers. Please do work to keep your emotions in check and to not snap at him if his questions betray a Latin bias. Though they are somewhat abrasive at times, I find his questions appropriate to this discussion and necessary to challenge our own tendencies toward Orthodox triumphalism, so I intend to leave them alone.

Green_Umbrella, this section of the forum is committed to fostering dialogue between Orthodox and Protestants specifically, so I'm not going to leave you a lot of room to assert your particularly Latin bias. Feel free to ask questions, but if you wish to continue telling us how you view the Church, contrary as your assertions are to the Orthodox point of view, then I ask you to state your claims on another more appropriate section of the forum, such as the Orthodox-Other Christian board.

Thank you.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator

[walter1234]

What kind of evidence are you looking for?

Catholic Church and Protestant Church also claim that they are the only true Church in this world.THeir teaching/Doctrine is also 100% correct.

Why would you think that only the teaching of Orthodox Church must be 100% correct while Catholic and Protestant must be 100% incorrect?

I do not think any protestant church can show apostolic succession. I do not even think they try do they? I have not seen any. The Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox can show apostolic succession. So ¨the church¨ is either one of them or both.

The reason apostolic succession is important is because in this unbroken chain is supposed the pure teaching and authority of the Christ. Unless you want to say something like ¨the church¨ is the ¨true believers¨ or those who really love Jesus or something like that. I guess that would be a protestant position.    

Now someone will come along and correct all I said but that is my understanding right now.

Protestant think that Bible is the word of GOd. Bible is everything. Beside the teaching of bible, they do not need to consider any other teaching. 

[Justin Kissel]

Protestant think that Bible is the word of GOd. Bible is everything. Beside the teaching of bible, they do not need to consider any other teaching. 

This is a position not supported by Scripture...

[Green_Umbrella]

What kind of evidence are you looking for?

Catholic Church and Protestant Church also claim that they are the only true Church in this world.THeir teaching/Doctrine is also 100% correct.

Why would you think that only the teaching of Orthodox Church must be 100% correct while Catholic and Protestant must be 100% incorrect?

I do not think any protestant church can show apostolic succession. I do not even think they try do they? I have not seen any. The Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox can show apostolic succession. So ¨the church¨ is either one of them or both.

The reason apostolic succession is important is because in this unbroken chain is supposed the pure teaching and authority of the Christ. Unless you want to say something like ¨the church¨ is the ¨true believers¨ or those who really love Jesus or something like that. I guess that would be a protestant position.    

Now someone will come along and correct all I said but that is my understanding right now.

Protestant think that Bible is the word of GOd. Bible is everything. Beside the teaching of bible, they do not need to consider any other teaching. 

Yeah well, where did the bible come from? 

[Green_Umbrella]

Greetings, all. I recognize that Green_Umbrella's words have offended a few of you here, but he asks some hard questions to which we Orthodox would do well to give well-reasoned, articulate answers. Please do work to keep your emotions in check and to not snap at him if his questions betray a Latin bias. Though they are somewhat abrasive at times, I find his questions appropriate to this discussion and necessary to challenge our own tendencies toward Orthodox triumphalism, so I intend to leave them alone.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator

That is right. you tell them!

This is not the Catholic Answers Forum. We do not shut people up for asking questions. There are no infallible Popes running around here to shut people up.

 

[PeterTheAleut]

Greetings, all. I recognize that Green_Umbrella's words have offended a few of you here, but he asks some hard questions to which we Orthodox would do well to give well-reasoned, articulate answers. Please do work to keep your emotions in check and to not snap at him if his questions betray a Latin bias. Though they are somewhat abrasive at times, I find his questions appropriate to this discussion and necessary to challenge our own tendencies toward Orthodox triumphalism, so I intend to leave them alone.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator

That is right. you tell them!

This is not the Catholic Answers Forum. We do not shut people up for asking questions. There are no infallible Popes running around here to shut people up.

  

Please go back and read my request again. I have added a paragraph that addresses you specifically.

[Green_Umbrella]

Greetings, all. I recognize that Green_Umbrella's words have offended a few of you here, but he asks some hard questions to which we Orthodox would do well to give well-reasoned, articulate answers. Please do work to keep your emotions in check and to not snap at him if his questions betray a Latin bias. Though they are somewhat abrasive at times, I find his questions appropriate to this discussion and necessary to challenge our own tendencies toward Orthodox triumphalism, so I intend to leave them alone.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator

That is right. you tell them!

This is not the Catholic Answers Forum. We do not shut people up for asking questions. There are no infallible Popes running around here to shut people up.

  

Please go back and read my request again. I have added a paragraph that addresses you specifically.

Ok, thanks.

[PeterTheAleut]

Greetings, all. I recognize that Green_Umbrella's words have offended a few of you here, but he asks some hard questions to which we Orthodox would do well to give well-reasoned, articulate answers. Please do work to keep your emotions in check and to not snap at him if his questions betray a Latin bias. Though they are somewhat abrasive at times, I find his questions appropriate to this discussion and necessary to challenge our own tendencies toward Orthodox triumphalism, so I intend to leave them alone.

- PeterTheAleut
Moderator

That is right. you tell them!

This is not the Catholic Answers Forum. We do not shut people up for asking questions. There are no infallible Popes running around here to shut people up.

  

Please go back and read my request again. I have added a paragraph that addresses you specifically.

Ok, thanks.

If you wish to respond to my addendum, please do so ONLY via private message, since I don't want discussion of my moderatorial request to clutter up this thread.

[Azul]

Green_umbrella's posts are always so full of rehashed latin propaganda.

Just asking questions.

Besides let us not be harsh to fellow Trinitarian believing Christians. No need to jump to a strong adversarial pose when the RCC is mentioned.

You weren't asking questions. You were making arguments for the RCC being the True Church in contrast to the Orthodox Church. If that's what you believe fine (and we'll agree to disagree) but please try to be honest as to what you were saying.

James

No. I am not making arguments for the RCC being the True Church in contrast to the Orthodox Church. And I am asking question. Someone answer please.

Did the Orthodox Church change its position on contraception and the Roman Catholic church has always held the same dogma? Anyone? I do not know and want to know.

Contraception is not a moral issue for the EOC.I don`t understand why the RCC tries to put its noze into people's bedroom.It must be the cause of all those celibately sexual frustrations.

[Azul]

Is there any evidence showing that Orthodox Church is the only Church founded by Jesus and His disciple in A.D 33?

History. 5 Patriarchs were there, one left the Church.

History. 5 Patriarchs were there, four left the Church?

The vote was 4 to 1.

Who are these 5 Patriarchs? Why are they so important??

Why can these four Patriachs help to prove Orthodox Church is the only true Church?

Can anybody ask my above question?

Is there any other STRONG evidence showing that Orthodox Church is the only true Church?

There is still no strong evidence to convince me that Orthodox Church is the only true Church and all its teaching is 100% correct...

Our ground is the Ecumenical Councils whom we held and the doctrine whom we enunciate.The majority of christian literature is Orthodox(eastern and oriental) and the language is greek.This Ecumenical councils gave you the creed, the trinity, the feasts, the christological and marian doctrines.Rome is just 1/5 of the Ancient Christian Centers.. All the centers are Petrine.. Rome (1/5) took its toys and left.. The Church continued to remain the Church.. The Orthodox Church helds to the Ecumenical Councils (whom is consider the deposit of the Church) strictly.. The RCC has added and broken many of these councils.. They added the fillioque to the Creed, they added to the faith : Purgatory , Created Grace , Papal Infaibility , Papal Supremacy, Immaculated Conception; changed the practice using unleaven bread for communion and no wine, removed the litany in the changing of the Holy Gifts, they invented Papal Indulgences and made use and abuse of the ecclesiastical title and made a shame out of it.

[Azul]

What kind of evidence are you looking for?

Catholic Church and Protestant Church also claim that they are the only true Church in this world. Why would you think that the teaching of Orthodox Church must be 100% correct while Catholic and Protestant must be 100% incorrect?

from the institutional church (universal , catholic) pov because we remained the same while the RCC changed the faith.

[Azul]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

The RCC during the times of the ww2 was an allied of Hitler and RCC clergy was involved in crimes and forced conversions all over the EU like the Ustaše in Serbia.


People thought that Paul was under the anathemas when the boat was sinking or when he was bit by snakes, and I bet they thought the same thing when he was stoned,incarcerated and persecuted..

Nice church.

[walter1234]

 What is the difference between Orthodoxy and Protestant/Catholic and make most of you here choose the Orthodoxy faith rather than Catholic or Protestant faith?


( There must be some or even many difference between true church and "False" Church. And that difference should be able to help us to identify which one is true and which one is false. )  

[PeterTheAleut]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

Before you get too carried away by your triumphalism, Azul, we do have the murderous Russian pogroms against the Jews and the persecution of the Old Believers to our credit. Not exactly nice fruits, either.

[88Devin12]

Protestants and Roman Catholics aren't 100% incorrect, we have the fullness of the truth, while they only have part of it (since they come from us).

[Cyrillic]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

The RCC during the times of the ww2 was an allied of Hitler and RCC clergy was involved in crimes and forced conversions all over the EU like the Ustaše in Serbia.

People thought that Paul was under the anathemas when the boat was sinking or when he was bit by snakes, and I bet they thought the same thing when he was stoned,incarcerated and persecuted..

Nice church.

I would criticise the RCC for a lot, but this is plain childish.

[PeterTheAleut]

Green_umbrella's posts are always so full of rehashed latin propaganda.

Just asking questions.

Besides let us not be harsh to fellow Trinitarian believing Christians. No need to jump to a strong adversarial pose when the RCC is mentioned.

You weren't asking questions. You were making arguments for the RCC being the True Church in contrast to the Orthodox Church. If that's what you believe fine (and we'll agree to disagree) but please try to be honest as to what you were saying.

James

No. I am not making arguments for the RCC being the True Church in contrast to the Orthodox Church. And I am asking question. Someone answer please.

Did the Orthodox Church change its position on contraception and the Roman Catholic church has always held the same dogma? Anyone? I do not know and want to know.

Contraception is not a moral issue for the EOC.

Actually, yes it is. Our Church has traditionally spoken against contraception. We just handle the use of contraception in a manner different from the Roman Church.

I don`t understand why the RCC tries to put its noze into people's bedroom.

And the Orthodox Church doesn't?

It must be the cause of all those celibately sexual frustrations.

Please be careful with your vain speculations, Azul.

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Most Orthodox fully recognize that for the first 1000 odd years we were functionally one.  Well I shouldn't say we, us Oriental Orthodox folks walked away from that table 500 years previously, however, the Byzantines and Latins were one.  After the Schism, Orthodox would essentially argue that Latins abandoned their legitimate posts, and therefore lost their Apostolic continuity.  So its not that the Catholic Church wasn't founded by Jesus Christ and His Apostles, its that the Orthodox Fathers argue that the Catholic fathers abandoned the true Faith of the Apostles and nullified their succession.

stay blessed,
habte selassie

[Αριστοκλής]

How many times have we had people come into our forum and assert that the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church is not the New Testament Church? Many, IIRC.
Apostolic Succession while important is not enough as we well know.

I times past in other discussions I prefer to ask the deniers of our maintenance and preservation of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith to specifically point to the exact place (event, time, date, what have you) when the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

I've yet to see an answer.

[jmbejdl]

What is the difference between Orthodoxy and Protestant/Catholic and make most of you here choose the Orthodoxy faith rather than Catholic or Protestant faith?


( There must be some or even many difference between true church and "False" Church. And that difference should be able to help us to identify which one is true and which one is false. )  

To the extent to which my conversion was an intellectual one (and it mostly wasn't - I experienced in Orthodoxy something completely lacking in Protestantism, which was the main thing) then I would have to say it is history and continuity. When I looked into the history of the Church I saw continuity in Orthodoxy, of belief and practice, that I did not see in any other Church and this confirmed, for me, intellectually, what I had concluded experientially. Honestly, you will not find a single smoking gun that any reasonable minded person would accept as proof. If you did the whole world, the whole Christian world at least, would be Orthodox. But... if you start to read the documents of the early Church, if you start to read the Fathers. If you look at Eusebius' history of the Church you will see something that looks, sounds and feels like Orthodoxy. You certainly won't find anything like sola scriptura or sola fide. You will find liturgy, veneration of saints etc. It's quite clear the early Church was not Protestant. You also won't, by my estimation, find any of the teachings that Rome has added in the second millennium. You certainly won't see a monarchical Pope of Rome ruling the whole Church. So for me there were two strands of 'proof' if you will - foremost was my experience of Orthodoxy, and reconfirming this was whole history of the Church from 33AD until today. Of course what convinces me may not necessarily convince you, but if you want a satisfactory answer to your question my best suggestion is that you read up on, in particular, the early, undivided Church.

James

[orthonorm]

How many times have we had people come into our forum and assert that the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church is not the New Testament Church? Many, IIRC.
Apostolic Succession while important is not enough as we well know.

I times past in other discussions I prefer to ask the deniers of our maintenance and preservation of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith to specifically point to the exact place (event, time, date, what have you) when the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

I've yet to see an answer.

Well it is a question without merit. You seem unwilling to understand their position of an invisible Church from the beginning till now which at times worked within what we call the RCC, the OC, or the OOCs.

Not all who claim the that Big Three around these parts don't have a monopoly on the truth are restorationists nor necessarily believe in some great apostasy.

[orthonorm]

the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

There is no New Testament Church.

Really, the problem with almost every discussion around here is that people begin with so many reckless assumptions.

The reason everyone can argue is that you all hold most of them in common.

[Cyrillic]

the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

There is no New Testament Church.

Care to explain that one?

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

There is no New Testament Church.

Care to explain that one?

The institutional Church existed for hundreds of years before there ever even was a canonical "New Testament" so of course there is no New Testament Church, that is a concept borrowed by Protestants which is how they replaced the concept of Apostolic Succession and it is an inaccurate tool for analysis, just as is the concept of a "Scriptural or Biblical" Church (i.e. disregarding the significance of Tradition)..

There is only the Apostolic Church.

stay blessed,
habte selassie

[orthonorm]

the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

There is no New Testament Church.

Care to explain that one?

Care to explain me to me how the Church is circumscribed within any period of time?

This is a case of relative accuracy but gross imprecision.

People don't take their own theology seriously enough and get sloppy with language in the day to day and that lack of precision in language then ends up informing their theology.

But if we took time to get serious and precise with our language, most people would not have the time, inclination, nor ability to engage in most of the polemics around here.

[orthonorm]

There is only the Apostolic Church.

Greater accuracy and greater precision.

However the Church existed before the Apostles.

We have to go back to the notion of what the Church is.

And no one wants to do that.

[Cyrillic]

There is only the Apostolic Church.

Greater accuracy and greater precision.

However the Church existed before the Apostles.

We have to go back to the notion of what the Church is.

And no one wants to do that.

The ekklesia of Israel.

[orthonorm]

There is only the Apostolic Church.

Greater accuracy and greater precision.

However the Church existed before the Apostles.

We have to go back to the notion of what the Church is.

And no one wants to do that.

The ekklesia of Israel.

Go on back!

Step back!

Earlier now!

[Cyrillic]

The children of Abraham?

[ZealousZeal]

Is there even an official Orthodox position on contraception?

You are asking me? 

I have no idea. That is why I am asking the question. It looks like no one else knows either! 

Getting back to this very briefly- Green_Umbrella, if you are truly interested and have time on your hands, do a forum search for "contraception". You will get oodles and oodles of threads where the topic has been hashed and re-hashed and re-re-hashed again.

[Justin Kissel]

Care to explain me to me how the Church is circumscribed within any period of time?

The incarnation...

[PeterTheAleut]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

There is no New Testament Church.

Care to explain that one?

The institutional Church existed for hundreds of years before there ever even was a canonical "New Testament" so of course there is no New Testament Church, that is a concept borrowed by Protestants which is how they replaced the concept of Apostolic Succession and it is an inaccurate tool for analysis, just as is the concept of a "Scriptural or Biblical" Church (i.e. disregarding the significance of Tradition)..

My point of disagreement with this is that the New Testament is more than just the books we call the canon of the New Testament Scriptures. The New Testament is really the covenant Christ established with us through the shedding of His blood. That collection of books we often call the New Testament merely bears witness to that covenant.

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

There is no New Testament Church.

Care to explain that one?

The institutional Church existed for hundreds of years before there ever even was a canonical "New Testament" so of course there is no New Testament Church, that is a concept borrowed by Protestants which is how they replaced the concept of Apostolic Succession and it is an inaccurate tool for analysis, just as is the concept of a "Scriptural or Biblical" Church (i.e. disregarding the significance of Tradition)..

My point of disagreement with this is that the New Testament is more than just the books we call the canon of the New Testament Scriptures. The New Testament is really the covenant Christ established with us through the shedding of His blood. That collection of books we often call the New Testament merely bears witness to that covenant.

True, I would agree that the New Testament becomes symbolic of this New Covenant which Christ established through the Church and more specifically through the Seven Divine Mysteries, however and again, strictly speaking the New Testament itself is a product of the Church rather than the Church being a product of the New Testament.  Yes, the books are testimony to the events and details surrounding the foundation of the New Covenant, but the Covenant is bigger, deeper, and more far-reaching than the narratives which describe it.  The Tradition is the manifestation of the details of the Covenant, and the Gospels (and all Scripture) is just another strongly weighted facet of the Tradition. 

stay blessed,
habte selassie

[Αριστοκλής]

How many times have we had people come into our forum and assert that the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church is not the New Testament Church? Many, IIRC.
Apostolic Succession while important is not enough as we well know.

I times past in other discussions I prefer to ask the deniers of our maintenance and preservation of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith to specifically point to the exact place (event, time, date, what have you) when the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

I've yet to see an answer.

Well it is a question without merit. You seem unwilling to understand their position of an invisible Church from the beginning till now which at times worked within what we call the RCC, the OC, or the OOCs.

Not all who claim the that Big Three around these parts don't have a monopoly on the truth are restorationists nor necessarily believe in some great apostasy.

You sound so much like GreekIsChristian (a.k.a. GiC) on his path to atheism. I will await serious responses.

[JorgenThorbjørnsen]

Why do Orthodox Christian say that Orthodox Church is founded by Jesus and his disciple, not Catholic Church?

Why do Orthodox Chrisitna say taht Orthodox Church is founded in A.D 33, not  in 10 th century?

Can anybody briefly tell me the history of Orthodox Church?

This: "founded in A.D 33" "founded by Jesus and his disciple"

[Azul]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

The RCC during the times of the ww2 was an allied of Hitler and RCC clergy was involved in crimes and forced conversions all over the EU like the Ustaše in Serbia.

People thought that Paul was under the anathemas when the boat was sinking or when he was bit by snakes, and I bet they thought the same thing when he was stoned,incarcerated and persecuted..

Nice church.

I would criticise the RCC for a lot, but this is plain childish.

what do you fin so childish about that?are you saying it`s not true?

[Azul]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

Before you get too carried away by your triumphalism, Azul, we do have the murderous Russian pogroms against the Jews and the persecution of the Old Believers to our credit. Not exactly nice fruits, either.

that is children`s play in comparison with the catholic crimes.

[ZealousZeal]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

Before you get too carried away by your triumphalism, Azul, we do have the murderous Russian pogroms against the Jews and the persecution of the Old Believers to our credit. Not exactly nice fruits, either.

that is children`s play in comparison with the catholic crimes.

"God, I thank you that I am not like other men..."

[PeterTheAleut]

Since when does Rome own Peter?Peter ≠ the Pope of Rome.

The Bible says "by their fruits you will know them" . The Crusades and the Inquisition.. hmm.. nice fruits..

Before you get too carried away by your triumphalism, Azul, we do have the murderous Russian pogroms against the Jews and the persecution of the Old Believers to our credit. Not exactly nice fruits, either.

that is children`s play in comparison with the catholic crimes.

So you're going to compare the murderous acts of the Orthodox against the murderous acts of the Latins as if it were some kind of game? The point I'm trying to make is that we've had rotten fruit fall off both the Orthodox and the Roman trees.

[orthonorm]

How many times have we had people come into our forum and assert that the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church is not the New Testament Church? Many, IIRC.
Apostolic Succession while important is not enough as we well know.

I times past in other discussions I prefer to ask the deniers of our maintenance and preservation of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith to specifically point to the exact place (event, time, date, what have you) when the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

I've yet to see an answer.

Well it is a question without merit. You seem unwilling to understand their position of an invisible Church from the beginning till now which at times worked within what we call the RCC, the OC, or the OOCs.

Not all who claim the that Big Three around these parts don't have a monopoly on the truth are restorationists nor necessarily believe in some great apostasy.

You sound so much like GreekIsChristian (a.k.a. GiC) on his path to atheism. I will await serious responses.

He was always a stickler for truth. That does seem to rub folks the wrong way at times.

[PeterTheAleut]

How many times have we had people come into our forum and assert that the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church is not the New Testament Church? Many, IIRC.
Apostolic Succession while important is not enough as we well know.

I times past in other discussions I prefer to ask the deniers of our maintenance and preservation of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith to specifically point to the exact place (event, time, date, what have you) when the Orthodox churches CEASED being the New Testament Church.

I've yet to see an answer.

Well it is a question without merit. You seem unwilling to understand their position of an invisible Church from the beginning till now which at times worked within what we call the RCC, the OC, or the OOCs.

Not all who claim the that Big Three around these parts don't have a monopoly on the truth are restorationists nor necessarily believe in some great apostasy.

You sound so much like GreekIsChristian (a.k.a. GiC) on his path to atheism. I will await serious responses.

He was always a stickler for truth. That does seem to rub folks the wrong way at times.

A stickler for alternative ways of looking at things, yes, but I'm not exactly sure it was truth GiC cared about.

[choy]

Why do Orthodox Christian say that Orthodox Church is founded by Jesus and his disciple, not Catholic Church?

Why do Orthodox Chrisitna say taht Orthodox Church is founded in A.D 33, not  in 10 th century?

Can anybody briefly tell me the history of Orthodox Church?

The Roman Catholic Church says they are founded by Jesus and his disciple (singular, which means Peter)

The Orthodox Church says they are founded by Jesus and all the Apostles

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

He was always a stickler for truth.

Haha you are indeed quite funny when you don't try so hard

Was that some kind of crass euphemism?

stay blessed,
habte selassie

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Protestant Discussion (Moderator: PeterTheAleut) > Topic: Orthodox Church is only true Church founded by Jesus and His disciple in A.D 33?