Christian Discussion Thread II

[Czechanada]

No, no and no some more.

The Eastern Orthodox Church <> the Roman Catholic Church.

So they hate each other?

Not anymore.

[Lancaster of Wessex]

No, no and no some more.

The Eastern Orthodox Church <> the Roman Catholic Church.

So they hate each other?

No, but there are in some instances, tension. There was a split between the two over doctrine (and likely other issues) in the ca. 11th century and have been in "schism" ever since, although there have been moves to improve relations, which is nice to see.

[Farnhamia]

So they hate each other?

No, but there are in some instances, tension. There was a split between the two over doctrine (and likely other issues) in the ca. 11th century and have been in "schism" ever since, although there have been moves to improve relations, which is nice to see.

Filioque! *runs away*

[Vazdania]

You are taking distinct Mormon beliefs and applying them to a Spiritualist Christian. That is equivalent to taking distinctly Catholic beliefs and applying them to a Baptist or Anabaptist.

You claimed that Mormons have similar beliefs to you.

Since you demonstrably don't believe in anything on that list of fundamental points of Mormon doctrine, this would appear to be untrue.

And Baptists and Anabaptists - as outgrowths of Catholicism - are far closer to Catholicism in doctrine than Mormonism is to Spiritualist Christianity.

I would say that are about the same level of closeness or apart-ness.

[Maineiacs]

I consider them to be.

You are incorrect in your consideration. You may consider Mormons to be Christian, but God does not.

Are you God? Do you have proof you speak for God? Are you his official representative on earth? No? I thought not.

[The Archregimancy]

And Baptists and Anabaptists - as outgrowths of Catholicism - are far closer to Catholicism in doctrine than Mormonism is to Spiritualist Christianity.

I would say that are about the same level of closeness or apart-ness.

Which merely shows you're not particularly well-informed about the history of Christian theology.

So they hate each other?

No, but there are in some instances, tension. There was a split between the two over doctrine (and likely other issues) in the ca. 11th century and have been in "schism" ever since, although there have been moves to improve relations, which is nice to see.

I don't get it actually, is there a History why Orthodox and Catholics didn't get along well? For I know about the Sunni and Shiite, it's all about who leads the Muslim people after Prophet Muhammad's death and they are divided over the leadership. So is there any relationship or events between the Orthodox and the Catholics that they didn't get along well?

It's a longish story.

The schism between Orthodoxy and Catholicism (and we tend to assign different blame for that depending on which side we're coming from) is conventionally dated to 1054; but there had been earlier schisms between us (the Photian schism of the 860s immediately comes to mind) that we'd managed to overcome. It was arguably only the events of the Fourth Crusade that made the schism of 1054 irrevocable.

That said, there's no real single readily identifiable event in the mutual history of the two most important strands of Christianity to compare with the death of the Caliph Ali in the Sunni-Shiite split. Instead, the schism was the outcome of gradually diverging traditions over time; certainly as a Muslim (I assume) you would find the immediate practical reason for the Great Schism of 1054 (as opposed to the longer term slow-burn theological reasons) to be wholly trivial.

The Wiki article on the schism would be a reasonable starting point for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East-West_Schism

It does its best to be neutral, and while the history isn't perfect, it's a decent starting reference for interested neutrals.

Hello people, I'm a Muslim, and I'm curios to know the difference between orthodoxy and Catholicism, I just want to know the fundamental differences

A not-definitive list of the most important differences might include....



Doctrinal position of the Pope of Rome -
Catholic: Pope has sole primacy over the entirety of the church, including in doctrine.
Orthodox: were the Pope not in schism with the church, he would be acknowledged as first among equals, but would not have doctrinal primacy.


Church governance -
Catholic: Sole church governed by the Pope (supported by a complex but single bureaucracy).
Orthodox: Church consists of 15 autonomous branches all in communion with each other, but governed separately; all bishops are equal in doctrine, though each branch of the Orthodox church typically has a head patriarch/bishop; Patriarch of Constantinople is just first among equals.


Nicene Creed -
Catholic: Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.
Orthodox: Holy Spirit proceeds from Father only.


Original Sin -
Catholic: Yes
Orthodox: No


Purgatory -
Catholic: Yes
Orthodox: No


Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God -
Catholic: Mother of God born inherently free of the stain of Original Sin
Orthodox: Mother of God did not sin, but as capable of sinning as any other human since there is no Original Sin for her to avoid


Married Priests:
Catholic: No (exception for Eastern Rite Catholics, who follow Orthodox rule)
Orthodox: Parish priests yes, but bishops must be monks


Contraception:
Catholic: No
Orthodox: Yes a lot of the time


Divorce:
Catholic: No
Orthodox: Yes, but maximum of two remarriages.

Filioque! *runs away*

<Makes sign of the cross in general direction of ageless heathen>

[Farnhamia]

Filioque! *runs away*

<Makes sign of the cross in general direction of ageless heathen>

*yells back* Bless you, too, ageless friend!

[Dieu Vous Benisse]

<Makes sign of the cross in general direction of ageless heathen>

*yells back* Bless you, too, ageless friend!

Did I miss something?

[Vazdania]

I would say that are about the same level of closeness or apart-ness.

Which merely shows you're not particularly well-informed about the history of Christian theology.

No, but there are in some instances, tension. There was a split between the two over doctrine (and likely other issues) in the ca. 11th century and have been in "schism" ever since, although there have been moves to improve relations, which is nice to see.

It's a longish story.

The schism between Orthodoxy and Catholicism (and we tend to assign different blame for that depending on which side we're coming from) is conventionally dated to 1054; but there had been earlier schisms between us (the Photian schism of the 860s immediately comes to mind) that we'd managed to overcome. It was arguably only the events of the Fourth Crusade that made the schism of 1054 irrevocable.

That said, there's no real single readily identifiable event in the mutual history of the two most important strands of Christianity to compare with the death of the Caliph Ali in the Sunni-Shiite split. Instead, the schism was the outcome of gradually diverging traditions over time; certainly as a Muslim (I assume) you would find the immediate practical reason for the Great Schism of 1054 (as opposed to the longer term slow-burn theological reasons) to be wholly trivial.

The Wiki article on the schism would be a reasonable starting point for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East-West_Schism

It does its best to be neutral, and while the history isn't perfect, it's a decent starting reference for interested neutrals.

A not-definitive list of the most important differences might include....



Doctrinal position of the Pope of Rome -
Catholic: Pope has sole primacy over the entirety of the church, including in doctrine.
Orthodox: were the Pope not in schism with the church, he would be acknowledged as first among equals, but would not have doctrinal primacy.


Church governance -
Catholic: Sole church governed by the Pope (supported by a complex but single bureaucracy).
Orthodox: Church consists of 15 autonomous branches all in communion with each other, but governed separately; all bishops are equal in doctrine, though each branch of the Orthodox church typically has a head patriarch/bishop; Patriarch of Constantinople is just first among equals.


Nicene Creed -
Catholic: Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.
Orthodox: Holy Spirit proceeds from Father only.


Original Sin -
Catholic: Yes
Orthodox: No


Purgatory -
Catholic: Yes
Orthodox: No


Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God -
Catholic: Mother of God born inherently free of the stain of Original Sin
Orthodox: Mother of God did not sin, but as capable of sinning as any other human since there is no Original Sin for her to avoid


Married Priests:
Catholic: No (exception for Eastern Rite Catholics, who follow Orthodox rule)
Orthodox: Parish priests yes, but bishops must be monks


Contraception:
Catholic: No
Orthodox: Yes a lot of the time


Divorce:
Catholic: No
Orthodox: Yes, but maximum of two remarriages.

Filioque! *runs away*

<Makes sign of the cross in general direction of ageless heathen>

1.) yes, Yes I do. And no it doesn't. Your making a statement that has no relevance to your previous argument. It would like me telling you about item A and you saying oh yes Item A and Item B are similar in this way and that, and then me saying Your ill informed on them when indeed you actually know something.

You my dear friend as stated previously are taking distictly Mormon beliefs and applying them to a Spiritualist Baptist.

It would be like me saying that Catholics aren't Christian because they pray to Mary. Your arguments have little validity. And if we go off of your logic we can safely assume that NO denomination which claims to be Christian is actually such.

[Farnhamia]

*yells back* Bless you, too, ageless friend!

Did I miss something?

No. Well, yes, but it's too complicated to explain.

[The Archregimancy]

Your arguments have little validity. And if we go off of your logic we can safely assume that NO denomination which claims to be Christian is actually such.

My argument isn't remotely what you appear to think it is.

I repeat:

I haven't once specifically stated in this thread that any group are or aren't Christian, which is possibly where the misunderstanding here lies.

My argument has been twofold:

1) That a group or individual's self-definition should never be taken as an automatic and inerrant guide to external acceptance of that self-definition.

2) That, theologically, Vazdania's statement that his own beliefs are 'close' to those of the LDS church is at best misleading since he rejects most of the core theology of that church. My long list of important LDS doctrinal beliefs wasn't intended as a list of things that are necessarily "the opposite of ... what defines a Christian", to use your phrase, but was rather intended as a list of LDS dogma that I thought Vazdania likely rejects. His response to that list indeed indicates that his own beliefs are further away from those of the LDS church than his initial statements would indicate.

As to your point over whether my arguments have validity, I think we can leave it to others in this thread to decide who's more consistently shown the more detailed understanding of comparative Christian theology over the longest period of time. I'm fairly relaxed about it.

[Dyakovo]

Your arguments have little validity. And if we go off of your logic we can safely assume that NO denomination which claims to be Christian is actually such.

My argument isn't remotely what you appear to think it is.

I repeat:

I haven't once specifically stated in this thread that any group are or aren't Christian, which is possibly where the misunderstanding here lies.

My argument has been twofold:

1) That a group or individual's self-definition should never be taken as an automatic and inerrant guide to external acceptance of that self-definition.

2) That, theologically, Vazdania's statement that his own beliefs are 'close' to those of the LDS church is at best misleading since he rejects most of the core theology of that church. My long list of important LDS doctrinal beliefs wasn't intended as a list of things that are necessarily "the opposite of ... what defines a Christian", to use your phrase, but was rather intended as a list of LDS dogma that I thought Vazdania likely rejects. His response to that list indeed indicates that his own beliefs are further away from those of the LDS church than his initial statements would indicate.

As to your point over whether my arguments have validity, I think we can leave it to others in this thread to decide who's more consistently shown the more detailed understanding of comparative Christian theology over the longest period of time. I'm fairly relaxed about it.

That's easy enough...
Archy, I choose you!
*captures Arch in a pokéball*

It's especially easy in this instance, since he hasn't bothered to say how his beliefs are similar to those of Mormons (yay! My phone recognizes the word now...).

[Menassa]

So are witnesses Christian?

It is to my understanding that they do not believe in the trinity.....

I haven't once specifically stated in this thread that any group are or aren't Christian, which is possibly where the misunderstanding here lies.

My argument has been twofold:

1) That a group or individual's self-definition should never be taken as an automatic and inerrant guide to external acceptance of that self-definition.

2) That, theologically, Vazdania's statement that his own beliefs are 'close' to those of the LDS church is at best misleading since he rejects most of the core theology of that church. My long list of important LDS doctrinal beliefs wasn't intended as a list of things that are necessarily "the opposite of ... what defines a Christian", to use your phrase, but was rather intended as a list of LDS dogma that I thought Vazdania likely rejects. His response to that list indeed indicates that his own beliefs are further away from those of the LDS church than his initial statements would indicate.



Dyakovo has raised a separate point about whether members of the LDS movement necessarily believe in the literal truth of the Book of Mormon that I'd like to address at some point - in fact I've written on that in some detail in the past, particularly as regards the leaders of the Community of Christ openly arguing for an allegorical interpretation - but I regrettably lack the time at this moment; but I'd like to come back to this in a day or two.

Forgive my ignorance.... I thought you and I had moved on to discuss the Trinity and it's effect on whether denominations are Christian or not.

But if I am mistaken than by all means.... you have the floor.

I don't think my question regarding homosexuality was ever answered. I am anti- gay, but I am one of those people who still listens to other people's point of views.

Many geared towards others who are anti- gay, but all may reply-

Why should homosexuality be illegal other than for moral reasons?

You have the classic Biblical reasons.... however these Biblical Laws are in no way meant to govern the people of every land all the time.

The Laws were not created for an unjust society (which may be a little a elitist, but eh, when you're chosen by God, then we can talk.)

Lastly there is always the idea that it is against creation, this opens a whole different can of worms whether homosexuality is 'natural' because of surrounding humans or maybe some sort of animal practice.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

So what are you guys talking about here? Or rather what is the current topic?

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Here. Now go wild.


Seriously, what is wrong with calling a god God nowadays?

We speak English here.

Ethnocentrism, at its finest.

Thank you.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

So what are you guys talking about here? Or rather what is the current topic?

Seriously, why don't you just read the last page or so?

[Farnhamia]

So what are you guys talking about here? Or rather what is the current topic?

Shouldn't Lenin be facing left on your flag?

[Conscentia]

So what are you guys talking about here? Or rather what is the current topic?

Shouldn't Lenin be facing left on your flag?

Lenin does face left on his flag.

[Xathranaar]

Then provide them.

Here. Now go wild.

I am.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jah

Seriously, what is wrong with calling a god God nowadays?

We speak English here.

I love the irony here: The linked google search is, "how does mormonism and christianity differ."

Apparently we don't speak it very well, though.

[Farnhamia]

Here. Now go wild.


Seriously, what is wrong with calling a god God nowadays?

We speak English here.

I love the irony here: The linked google search is, "how does mormonism and christianity differ."

Apparently we don't speak it very well, though.

You mean, we don't speak it very good.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Here. Now go wild.


Seriously, what is wrong with calling a god God nowadays?

We speak English here.

I love the irony here: The linked google search is, "how does mormonism and christianity differ."

Apparently we don't speak it very well, though.

Woops, you're right. I am ashamed.

[Conscentia]

Here. Now go wild.


Seriously, what is wrong with calling a god God nowadays?

We speak English here.

I love the irony here: The linked google search is, "how does mormonism and christianity differ."

Apparently we don't speak it very well, though.

What? I don't see the problem with his usage of "does".

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

So what are you guys talking about here? Or rather what is the current topic?

Seriously, why don't you just read the last page or so?

I had TGs and RP's to respond to.

So what are you guys talking about here? Or rather what is the current topic?

Shouldn't Lenin be facing left on your flag?

He does.

[Farnhamia]

Seriously, why don't you just read the last page or so?

I had TGs and RP's to respond to.

Shouldn't Lenin be facing left on your flag?

He does.

Oh. Damn. *summons Guards* Take me away.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I love the irony here: The linked google search is, "how does mormonism and christianity differ."

Apparently we don't speak it very well, though.

What? I don't see the problem with his usage of "does".

It should be either "how does Mormonism differ from Christianity" or "how do Mormonism and Christianity differ".