Protestantism might just be Christianity

[Constantinopolis]

You are mistaken. He believes (as do I, and as do many Christians) that non-Christians have a chance of going to Heaven.

By converting to Christianity?

No. By acting as if they were followers of Christ without realizing it.

[The New Sea Territory]

I see all religions as basically the same.
Just the hate between them separates them

I see all political ideologies as basically just the same.

It's just the funky logos that separates them.

A way he could have said that better would be "All Abrahamic Religions", because they are all very, very, very similar.

[Kiruri]

By converting to Christianity?

No. By acting as if they were followers of Christ without realizing it.

Are you saying religion doesn't matter? I mean, what's the point of it, then?

[Conkerials]

I don't know how to feel, should I point out that the Orthodox church is a horrible institution? Should I point out that it is idolatrous? Should I point out that it stands up for fascism or, should I just get angry and spill my hypothetical coffee?

The Orthodox Church is arguably the least idolatrous of Protestants, Catholics, and the Orthodox. Many apparently claim Protestants to be bible worshippers, Catholics are all extravagant and saint-worshipping (plus Mary worshipping) and the Pope and such. The Orthodox are really grassroots plain dressing and such.

[Shaggai]

>anarcho-monarchist

Read the sig. To quote: Libertarian Monarchism is a liberal traditionalist, anti-egalitarian, and anti-democratic movement that stresses cultural tradition, societal responsibility, individual liberty, personal virtue, market localism, and voluntary segregation along with familial, religious, and regional identity rooted in self-ownership and personified by a monarch. Anarcho-monarchism is like that, except more so.

Seriously, sigs aren't that hard to read. Especially when you're looking for a person's political views.

(Also, greentexting? Bad taste.)

[Benuty]

I see all political ideologies as basically just the same.

It's just the funky logos that separates them.

A way he could have said that better would be "All Abrahamic Religions", because they are all very, very, very similar.

The Manicheans were very unique though .

[Shaggai]

No. By acting as if they were followers of Christ without realizing it.

Are you saying religion doesn't matter? I mean, what's the point of it, then?

Obligatory atheist answer: None.

Obligatory Nyarlathotep answer: None, except to make me like you more. And that only applies if you worship me.

Christian answer: Because then you have the model all set out for you, and you know you got it right.

[Constantinopolis]

No. By acting as if they were followers of Christ without realizing it.

Are you saying religion doesn't matter? I mean, what's the point of it, then?

Salvation - going to Heaven - is like finding your way out of the woods at night. In principle, anyone could make it, even without help, just by accidentally stumbling upon the correct way to go. However, it is extremely helpful to have a map and a source of light. That vastly increases your chances of finding the way out.

The purpose of the Church is to be that map and that light.

[Kiruri]

Are you saying religion doesn't matter? I mean, what's the point of it, then?

Salvation - going to Heaven - is like finding your way out of the woods at night. In principle, anyone could make it, even without help, just by accidentally stumbling upon the correct way to go. However, it is extremely helpful to have a map and a source of light. That vastly increases your chances of finding the way out.

The purpose of the Church is to be that map and that light.

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

[Shaggai]

Salvation - going to Heaven - is like finding your way out of the woods at night. In principle, anyone could make it, even without help, just by accidentally stumbling upon the correct way to go. However, it is extremely helpful to have a map and a source of light. That vastly increases your chances of finding the way out.

The purpose of the Church is to be that map and that light.

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

Atheist answer: None. There's no way to successfully choose.

Nyarlathotep answer: Worship me. I will give you ancient and forbidden knowledge, especially if you look into the Shining Trapezohedron.

[Kiruri]

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

Atheist answer: None. There's no way to successfully choose.

Nyarlathotep answer: Worship me. I will give you ancient and forbidden knowledge, especially if you look into the Shining Trapezohedron.

I'm being serious, I wanna know

[Mostrov]

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

Orthodox Christians as said before fall very much on the mystical side of the spectrum, as opposed to the Western trend towards Legalism. So many of these answers can be rightfully said to be unknown; they don't need to be answered as it is worked through God.

[Reverend Norv]

As far as I can tell, the argument here boils down to a stark disagreement over the nature of the Christian religion itself.

For the OP, if I am reading his arguments correctly - and I hope he will correct me if I am not - Christianity is essentially a continuous historical community. This is the point in Apostolic Succession; we are all, in some sense, descendants of some original Christian community in the first-century Mediterranean world. Their traditions have come forward to us; so too has the sacred trust given unto them. So a Protestant church that has not been sanctified by a "real" bishop - a bishop who can trace his consecration back to an apostle, and thence to Christ Himself - is not a real church, because it stands outside this two-thousand year old historical community.

Historically, I believe that this is inaccurate. It is my opinion that between the Diocletianic Persecutions and the conversion of Reccared I, the thread of apostolic continuity was almost certainly lost in most of post-Roman Western Europe due to comprehensive social disruption and centuries of Arian persecution. Because the Western Church then carried Christianity north into barbarian lands as far east as Poland, it follows that almost the entire Roman Catholic Church does not, in fact, exist in the same line of apostolic succession as the pre-Diocletianic Church.

Naturally, there is no way to prove or disprove this. Given that we do not have consecration records for every bishop who lived between A.D. 300 and A.D. 600, it is impossible to know whether my surmise is correct; the question is a matter of historical probabilities. This may matter to the OP. It does not matter to me.

The reason why the question does not matter to me is that I - like most Protestants - have a different definition of the Christian religion. It is not, as far as I am concerned, a continuous historical community. It is a set of ideals, principles, beliefs, and spiritual truths. It is, in other words, not human but divine.

These beliefs are revealed, yes, in the Bible. But this need not necessarily be because the Bible's authors were divinely inspired. As Calvin wrote, "the Holy Scriptures of the New and Old Testaments, read under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, are God's holy book of truth." The key phrase there is "read under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit." The process of revelation is continuing, unending, forever new for every generation. We turn to the Bible, and when the Holy Spirit inspires our reading, then God speaks to us. The author is not the key recipient of God's word; the reader is. For the Bible is not a mere book - it is a conduit for God's grace, a channel of revelation.

What it means to be a Christian, then, is not to belong to a historical community that may or may not date back two millennia. What it means to be a Christian is to turn, today, here and now, to a Christ who is as alive in A.D. 2014 as He was in A.D. 30. It is to seek God's word, and praise God's goodness, and fall upon God's mercy. It can be done alone, or in great numbers; it can involve the unbroken apostolic succession of the Syraic Church, or the schismatic zeal of the Pentecostalists.

It is God's grace that leads a Christian to belief; we are a chosen people, with whom God has entered into a new covenant of grace. Thus it is grace and belief, not institutional history, that makes a Christian. It is the present encounter with God, not the centuries-old encounter with the apostles, that defines a Christian's spirituality. God is calling us now, whether or not He called some bishop in the Early Middle Ages. If, by His grace, we answer that call - then we are Christians.

Such is the definition that I use, and that many Protestants use. It is so profoundly, axiomatically different from the OP's "historical-community" definition that I see little purpose in debate. Ultimately, we mean very different things by "Christianity": in one definition, the Faith and the historical Church are one, whereas in the other they are not. I see no way to prove that either definition is logically unsound; all I can say is that the OP's definition seems to me personally to be gravely spiritually unsound - as my definition surely seems to him. To that extent, perhaps, the OP may have a point; there is a very real sense in which we two belong to qualitatively different religions. But as to which of those religions is Christianity? Well - perhaps only Almighty God knows for sure.

[Constantinopolis]

Salvation - going to Heaven - is like finding your way out of the woods at night. In principle, anyone could make it, even without help, just by accidentally stumbling upon the correct way to go. However, it is extremely helpful to have a map and a source of light. That vastly increases your chances of finding the way out.

The purpose of the Church is to be that map and that light.

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

I believe that the correct "map" is the one given by Christ to the Apostles, and preserved by the Orthodox Church.

But I can't persuade you of that without launching into a very long discussion, so let's just say that you should carefully study all "maps" before you decide which one you think is correct.

[Jumalariik]

Because I think that you are serious, and because I'm a believer that I am a Christian, as are you, I will try to dissuade you from your position.

First, what is a Christian?
For all intents and purposes, let's use the historical definition of a Christian that has been around since 325, the Nicene Creed:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

To show that some protestants at least are Christian, I will use the principles of the Church that I go to, because I know it well. (Pawtuxet Baptist Church)

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

We believe that there is one living and true God, eternally existing in three persons; that these are equal in every divine perfection, and that they execute distinct but harmonious offices in the work of creation, providence and redemption.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

We believe in Jesus Christ, the pre-existent and eternal Son of God. Through Him all things were created. He is God in the flesh, co-equal with the Father. God's only begotten Son, conceived by the Holy Spirit. We believe in His virgin birth, sinless life, miracles, and teachings. We believe in His substitutionary atoning death, bodily resurrection, ascension into heaven, perpetual intercession for His people, and personal visible return to earth.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

We believe the Holy Spirit is eternally existent and equal with God the Father and the Son of God, Jesus Christ. His purpose is to convict the world of Sin, make people aware of their need for Christ, and lead them to an understanding of the Truth. He resides with believers from the moment of salvation and is the sign and seal of their redemption and adoption as children of God. He produces spiritual fruit in the lives of believers, which results in godly living; He empowers and gifts them for ministry; and He works to continually grow Christians through the process of sanctification – making holy those who have been made holy by the justification of Christ’s work.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

We believe in the universal church, a living spiritual body of which Christ is the head and all regenerated persons are members. We believe in the local church, consisting of a company of believers in Jesus Christ, baptized on a credible profession of faith, and associated for worship, work, and fellowship. We believe that God has laid upon the members of the local church the primary task of giving the gospel of Jesus Christ to a lost world.

Done. The top one on each is the Nicene Creed, the bottom is from the Bylaws of the church that I go to.
Source?
http://www.pawtuxetbaptist.com/believe.html

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

Do you REALLY want to reignite a 600 year old debate? REALLY?

[Shaggai]

Atheist answer: None. There's no way to successfully choose.

Nyarlathotep answer: Worship me. I will give you ancient and forbidden knowledge, especially if you look into the Shining Trapezohedron.

I'm being serious, I wanna know

That first one is my serious answer. The second is Nyarlathotep's serious answer. If you look at my sig, you will see that this is a shared account between me and It.

[Jumalariik]

Do you REALLY want to reignite a 600 year old debate? REALLY?

I don;t want to debate this without a sword and a matchlock.

[Herskerstad]

I see all political ideologies as basically just the same.

It's just the funky logos that separates them.

A way he could have said that better would be "All Abrahamic Religions", because they are all very, very, very similar.

I am too tired to even begin debating such an oversimplification.

[Mostrov]

Because I think that you are serious, and because I'm a believer that I am a Christian, as are you, I will try to dissuade you from your position.

First, what is a Christian?
For all intents and purposes, let's use the historical definition of a Christian that has been around since 325, the Nicene Creed

What is your explanation of the Universal and Catholic Church section? Repeating the Nicene Creed isn't particularly impressive, considering that most other Christians of protestant denominations likely do - so why aren't they correct?

[Kiruri]

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

Orthodox Christians as said before fall very much on the mystical side of the spectrum, as opposed to the Western trend towards Legalism. So many of these answers can be rightfully said to be unknown; they don't need to be answered as it is worked through God.

Well, what an unsatisfying answer. That's just basically stating those answers aren't important. It's too complicated for you to try to understand, just do whatever and hope to leave the woods all in one piece.

[Jumalariik]

Because I think that you are serious, and because I'm a believer that I am a Christian, as are you, I will try to dissuade you from your position.

First, what is a Christian?
For all intents and purposes, let's use the historical definition of a Christian that has been around since 325, the Nicene Creed

What is your explanation of the Universal and Catholic Church section? Repeating the Nicene Creed isn't particularly impressive, considering that most other Christians of protestant denominations likely do - so why aren't they correct?

Look at the definition of Catholic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_term_%22Catholic%22

The word catholic (with lowercase c; derived via Late Latin catholicus, from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning "universal"[1][2])

[Mostrov]

Look at the definition of Catholic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_term_%22Catholic%22

The word catholic (with lowercase c; derived via Late Latin catholicus, from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning "universal"[1][2])

I am well aware of both the Latin and Greek meanings, what I ask is how does your Church have any claims towards universality?

[Constantinopolis]

Reverend Norv, I basically agree with your final paragraph: We simply have different definitions of "Christianity", and there is never much point in arguing over definitions. Sometimes people use the same word to mean different things, and that's fine.

On a bit of a tangential note, however, I wanted to address one of your points:

Historically, I believe that this is inaccurate. It is my opinion that between the Diocletianic Persecutions and the conversion of Reccared I, the thread of apostolic continuity was almost certainly lost in most of post-Roman Western Europe due to comprehensive social disruption and centuries of Arian persecution. Because the Western Church then carried Christianity north into barbarian lands as far east as Poland, it follows that almost the entire Roman Catholic Church does not, in fact, exist in the same line of apostolic succession as the pre-Diocletianic Church.

Even if that were true, it would not affect the Orthodox Church, and especially not those parts of her that are in the Middle East, or trace their origins to the Middle East.

[Kiruri]

In which case... what "map" should I use? I'm pretty sure there's one map, or do all roads lead out of the wood? But in that case, what about the contradictions between certain belief systems?

I believe that the correct "map" is the one given by Christ to the Apostles, and preserved by the Orthodox Church.

But I can't persuade you of that without launching into a very long discussion, so let's just say that you should carefully study all "maps" before you decide which one you think is correct.

So it all boils down to what "I" think is correct? What if I'm wrong? Is there a right or wrong? Would God care if I choose wrong? Is it not possible to just live life exactly as Jesus and the Apostles did and get out of the woods without needing to adhere to a certain church?