Christian Discussion Thread XI: Anicetus’ Revenge

[Salus Maior]

Non-denominational Christianity is Protestantism, even if you don't like the label.

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

[Tarsonis]

Non-denominational Christianity is Protestantism, even if you don't like the label.

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Protestantism isn't a denomination in and of itself, rather a categorization of all the denominations that stand in separation from, and thus in opposition to, the ancient churches. (Primarily Roman, but they're not fans of the Orthodox, Oriental, and Syriac....or eachother for that matter.) sharing a common text i.e the 66 book cut of the Bible, and a shared belief in the 5 solaes. Non-denominational is itself a denomination even if it has no formal creed, or central structure. It also fits said description.

[New Visayan Islands]

I think the biggest problem for any Christian in the world these days is the total invasion of Pagan idolatry into the secular world.

Just try to walk into a shop without religious symbols on clothes, jewelry, and other accessories, or a restaurant without Buddha statues, or a book store filled to the brim with new age works posing as philosophy rather than religion.

To paraphrase a quote from a video game:

"Beware he who would deny you the freedom to practice your faith, for in his heart, he dreams himself your God."

[Lower Nubia]

If you can’t do them alone, where are you doing them?

Right now? Nowhere. Haven't been to church in years. I'd like to, really, but I find most churches unable to deliver an engaging service. While I'm sure the standard service might be enough for a more devout person, I'm really not that devout so I can't garner interest. There was one church I went to that had a very cool service where they even brought a rock band on stage, engaged with the crowd on a personal level, made a few light-hearted jokes here and there, advertised for a local charity they worked with, and some other stuff that kind of broke from the traditional church service. If I ever can bring myself to attend another church I might try to find one like that.

Oh goodness, no wonder you’re having difficulty with Christian concepts, you attend spiritual conference centres with music.

What? How can you not see what it has to say; God has used stone and earth as his home before, and now. Making your comment redundant.

See, to me it's saying the Holy Spirit blessed a temple. Unless there's supposed to be a symbolic meaning behind it then it seems rather un-noteworthy.

It literally says descended and filled the house of the Lord. Seeing as the Lord dwelt in the Ark of the Convenant. You’know, the thing you said was finite and thus God would never dwell there.

[Rosmana]

I think the biggest problem for any Christian in the world these days is the total invasion of Pagan idolatry into the secular world.

Just try to walk into a shop without religious symbols on clothes, jewelry, and other accessories, or a restaurant without Buddha statues, or a book store filled to the brim with new age works posing as philosophy rather than religion.

To paraphrase a quote from a video game:

"Beware he who would deny you the freedom to practice your faith, for in his heart, he dreams himself your God."

The point is that it is being forced on people, I want the freedom to practice MY faith WITHOUT Pagan images in my house, and books about religion should be in the religion department, NOT the philosophy department.

[The Archregimancy]

This thread isn't a hangout, it's a debate and discussion thread. Hell, I wish it was a hangout thread sometimes, but when we get too chatty, Arch cracks the whip and tells us to get back to debating.

I've been away for several weeks due to pressing RL concerns, but am slowly coming back to activity.

In the light of some events in NSG about a month ago, I would stress the importance of the above point. I would like to ask all of you to make sure that this thread remains a discussion thread, and not a chat thread.

No one's going to crack down on a bit of occasional light banter, but please try and make sure that the focus is firmly on discussion of Christianity first and banter second.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Non-denominational nicene Christianity is by its very nature protestant, because any nicene Christianity that isn't part of the ancient churches is protestant.

This must be some goofy Catholic view because I've never heard of such a thing.

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

Not sure what you're asking. What do I base my belief in God and Christ on?

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Protestantism isn't a denomination in and of itself, rather a categorization of all the denominations that stand in separation from, and thus in opposition to, the ancient churches. (Primarily Roman, but they're not fans of the Orthodox, Oriental, and Syriac....or eachother for that matter.) sharing a common text i.e the 66 book cut of the Bible, and a shared belief in the 5 solaes. Non-denominational is itself a denomination even if it has no formal creed, or central structure. It also fits said description.

I disagree. I specifically identify as non-denominational precisely because I reject Protestantism because it broke away from it's original aim of reforming the corrupt Catholic Church and instead furthering the divide between Christians resulting in numerous religious wars and spawning several rather heretical movements. The Protestant Reformation was a mistake because it was not a reformation but a secession.

My views come from a mix of the traditional, ancient churches and the newer ones that haven't completely gone full un-Christian. I would not consider myself Protestant in any meaning of the word.

It literally says descended and filled the house of the Lord. Seeing as the Lord dwelt in the Ark of the Convenant. You’know, the thing you said was finite and thus God would never dwell there.

I never even mentioned the Ark of the Covenant wtf?

To paraphrase a quote from a video game:

"Beware he who would deny you the freedom to practice your faith, for in his heart, he dreams himself your God."

The point is that it is being forced on people, I want the freedom to practice MY faith WITHOUT Pagan images in my house, and books about religion should be in the religion department, NOT the philosophy department.

The cool thing about having your own house is that you can decide whether you want pagan idolatry in it or not.

[Australian rePublic]

Once when discussing with some other Orthodox Christians about why God would allow something like the Holocaust to happen, one of them suggested that the Holocaust brought people toward. I find this hard to believe. Disregarding the people who were turned away from God because of the Holocaust, am I supposed to believe that God would allow someone to exist who would orchastrate something as horrific as the Holocaust just for a bit of validation? What do you guys think?

[The Archregimancy]

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Protestantism isn't a denomination in and of itself, rather a categorization of all the denominations that stand in separation from, and thus in opposition to, the ancient churches. (Primarily Roman, but they're not fans of the Orthodox, Oriental, and Syriac....or eachother for that matter.) sharing a common text i.e the 66 book cut of the Bible, and a shared belief in the 5 solaes. Non-denominational is itself a denomination even if it has no formal creed, or central structure. It also fits said description.

Just quickly confirming that the Orthodox Church would largely agree with the above. 'Protestantism' isn't a denomination, it's rather a catch-all term for all a variety of post-Reformation groups, whether large self-contained denominations (such as Lutheranism) or small unaffiliated non-denominational churches in the back of beyond set up by one pastor and his dog. It's a term of convenience rather than an indication of shared denomination.

Indeed, many Orthodox theologians would go further and argue that Catholicism and the myriad denominations and churches filed for convenience under 'Protestant' are two sides of the same coin, growing out of a shared Western Christian tradition, and with the latter largely defining their position within Christianity against the former. While some early Calvinists tried to find points of dialogue with Orthodoxy (which were occasionally reciprocated), and some modern Anglicans often seek points of commonality (which, again, are sometimes reciprocated, though not always with a totally shared understanding of intent), for the most part there's been little attempt by Protestants to define themselves in relationship to Orthodoxy; the focus is almost entirely on Catholicism (a phenomenon which the recent debate in this thread has perhaps served as an excellent example of). There are honourable exceptions to this observation within both Protestant and Orthodox traditions, but for the most part Western Christianity defines itself via a Protestant-Catholic dichotomy; Protestants more so than Catholics since the latter are usually aware of the need to at least address Orthodoxy within broader claims to be the sole universal church. This dichotomy is probably exacerbated in NSG since so much debate originates from Anglophone countries where Orthodoxy has traditionally not had a strong presence; but we still remain the second-largest single denomination in Christianity, and while we might be a little distracted right now by unedifying internal jurisdictional disputes, we're not going anywhere in the near future.

[Tarsonis]

Non-denominational nicene Christianity is by its very nature protestant, because any nicene Christianity that isn't part of the ancient churches is protestant.

This must be some goofy Catholic view because I've never heard of such a thing.

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

Not sure what you're asking. What do I base my belief in God and Christ on?

Protestantism isn't a denomination in and of itself, rather a categorization of all the denominations that stand in separation from, and thus in opposition to, the ancient churches. (Primarily Roman, but they're not fans of the Orthodox, Oriental, and Syriac....or eachother for that matter.) sharing a common text i.e the 66 book cut of the Bible, and a shared belief in the 5 solaes. Non-denominational is itself a denomination even if it has no formal creed, or central structure. It also fits said description.

I disagree. I specifically identify as non-denominational precisely because I reject Protestantism because it broke away from it's original aim of reforming the corrupt Catholic Church and instead furthering the divide between Christians resulting in numerous religious wars and spawning several rather heretical movements. The Protestant Reformation was a mistake because it was not a reformation but a secession.

My views come from a mix of the traditional, ancient churches and the newer ones that haven't completely gone full un-Christian. I would not consider myself Protestant in any meaning of the word.

It literally says descended and filled the house of the Lord. Seeing as the Lord dwelt in the Ark of the Convenant. You’know, the thing you said was finite and thus God would never dwell there.

I never even mentioned the Ark of the Covenant wtf?

The point is that it is being forced on people, I want the freedom to practice MY faith WITHOUT Pagan images in my house, and books about religion should be in the religion department, NOT the philosophy department.

The cool thing about having your own house is that you can decide whether you want pagan idolatry in it or not.

I mean, you can believe what ever you want, but it doesnt change the fact that Protestantism has a commonly understood definition in both the academic and religious spheres, and your personal belief is not it.

[Salus Maior]

Not sure what you're asking. What do I base my belief in God and Christ on?

Yep.

[Kedri]

Non-denomination is the specific rejection of any denomination, including Protestantism. You can't simultaneously be denominational and non-denominational. That makes no sense.

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

He could possibly mean he's a part of the Restoration movement (churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, etc.) The Restorationists often do not regard themselves as Protestants and probably could be considered non-denominational, although idk how many would accept or ready that label.

[Salus Maior]

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

He could possibly mean he's a part of the Restoration movement (churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, etc.) The Restorationists often do not regard themselves as Protestants and probably could be considered non-denominational, although idk how many would accept or ready that label.

I mean...Restorationists are also Protestant.

[Kedri]

He could possibly mean he's a part of the Restoration movement (churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, etc.) The Restorationists often do not regard themselves as Protestants and probably could be considered non-denominational, although idk how many would accept or ready that label.

I mean...Restorationists are also Protestant.

Under that definition, that would include JW's and Mormons.

[Salus Maior]

I mean...Restorationists are also Protestant.

Under that definition, that would include JW's and Mormons.

JW's and Mormons are under LDS. They are also restorationist, but the rest of their theology is completely different from anything normative in Christianity.

[Tarsonis]

He could possibly mean he's a part of the Restoration movement (churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, etc.) The Restorationists often do not regard themselves as Protestants and probably could be considered non-denominational, although idk how many would accept or ready that label.

I mean...Restorationists are also Protestant.

I think you have to be Christian to qualify as protestant.

[Bienenhalde]

Non-denominational Christianity is Protestantism, even if you don't like the label.

Much as it pains me to be associated with such people, such a statement is theologically and historically correct.

[Rosmana]

I mean...Restorationists are also Protestant.

I think you have to be Christian to qualify as protestant.

But you do not have to be protestant to qualify as Christian.

[Lower Nubia]

It literally says descended and filled the house of the Lord. Seeing as the Lord dwelt in the Ark of the Convenant. You’know, the thing you said was finite and thus God would never dwell there.

I never even mentioned the Ark of the Covenant wtf?

You said:

"Churches are just buildings. Physical, material constructs of no real consequence. Temporary and finite. God needs no temples on Earth."

Which contradicts the basic fact that God dwelt in the House of the Lord in the Ark of the Covenant, which is both gold, stone, and brick, and temporary.

It's clear you've contradicted the scripture as God can dwell for long periods of time in temporary, finite, and earthly things.

[Diopolis]

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

He could possibly mean he's a part of the Restoration movement (churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, etc.) The Restorationists often do not regard themselves as Protestants and probably could be considered non-denominational, although idk how many would accept or ready that label.

Restorationists by and large are not Nicene Christians. That makes them something rather special that's further away from protestantism than the latter is from Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

[Auristania]

I mean...Restorationists are also Protestant.

I think you have to be Christian to qualify as protestant.

JW and LDS reject Nicene Creed, they ain't Christians, so they ain't Prods.

I don't know whether Restorationists and Non-Demoninationalists reject Nicene Creed, but if they do, they ain't Prods neither.

[Tarsonis]

I never even mentioned the Ark of the Covenant wtf?

You said:

"Churches are just buildings. Physical, material constructs of no real consequence. Temporary and finite. God needs no temples on Earth."

Which contradicts the basic fact that God dwelt in the House of the Lord in the Ark of the Covenant, which is both gold, stone, and brick, and temporary.

It's clear you've contradicted the scripture as God can dwell for long periods of time in temporary, finite, and earthly things.

Except that's not what he said. He didn't say can't, said "Doesn't need to."

[Lower Nubia]

You said:



Which contradicts the basic fact that God dwelt in the House of the Lord in the Ark of the Covenant, which is both gold, stone, and brick, and temporary.

It's clear you've contradicted the scripture as God can dwell for long periods of time in temporary, finite, and earthly things.

Except that's not what he said. He didn't say can't, said "Doesn't need to."

Yes, but God also does not need followers. That's not a sound argument to put forward against following God though. Which makes the "God does not need <x>" redundant anyway - as God needs nothing.

[Luminesa]

Non-denominational nicene Christianity is by its very nature protestant, because any nicene Christianity that isn't part of the ancient churches is protestant.

This must be some goofy Catholic view because I've never heard of such a thing.

Non-denominationalism is usually pretty close to low-church Protestants like Baptists.

Even so, Protestantism is not so much a specific denomination as it is an umbrella of denominations.

What exactly do you believe personally? What do you base your belief on?

Not sure what you're asking. What do I base my belief in God and Christ on?

Protestantism isn't a denomination in and of itself, rather a categorization of all the denominations that stand in separation from, and thus in opposition to, the ancient churches. (Primarily Roman, but they're not fans of the Orthodox, Oriental, and Syriac....or eachother for that matter.) sharing a common text i.e the 66 book cut of the Bible, and a shared belief in the 5 solaes. Non-denominational is itself a denomination even if it has no formal creed, or central structure. It also fits said description.

I disagree. I specifically identify as non-denominational precisely because I reject Protestantism because it broke away from it's original aim of reforming the corrupt Catholic Church and instead furthering the divide between Christians resulting in numerous religious wars and spawning several rather heretical movements. The Protestant Reformation was a mistake because it was not a reformation but a secession.

My views come from a mix of the traditional, ancient churches and the newer ones that haven't completely gone full un-Christian. I would not consider myself Protestant in any meaning of the word.

It literally says descended and filled the house of the Lord. Seeing as the Lord dwelt in the Ark of the Convenant. You’know, the thing you said was finite and thus God would never dwell there.

I never even mentioned the Ark of the Covenant wtf?

The point is that it is being forced on people, I want the freedom to practice MY faith WITHOUT Pagan images in my house, and books about religion should be in the religion department, NOT the philosophy department.

The cool thing about having your own house is that you can decide whether you want pagan idolatry in it or not.

I’m a little sleepy so I can’t address some of the posts I’ve read recently (I looked at this thread when I woke-up Sunday morning...and then my head literally dropped onto the pillow, because I still had another hour to sleep before I got up for Mass), but I’d like to maybe answer a couple of things, at least in this post. I can answer about the need for churches versus not maybe when I’ve had more sleep.

I think the problem is that the most ancient churches are Catholics, Orthodox, Coptics, and the Christians of India (some congregations date back to St. Thomas’s ministry there in the 1st century). So if you’re basing some of your beliefs in ancient Christianity, then they probably pull from one of the Nicene Churches (I believe all four are considered Nicene Churches). Unless you’re Moravian (which is technically pre-Reformation) or Waldensian (also pre-Reformation), you’re likely going to be pulling from one of the Nicene or Chalcedonian traditions.

The Catholic Church does have corruption, but unfortunately most churches in the world do. The Catholic Church happens to be the largest, and thus its corruption is most visible, but efforts are being made to tackle it. Many have said we are not a temple of saints, but a hospital for sinners. I think this is very true and should warn us that all of us have a particular duty to strive for holiness, even in spite of our sinfulness and the failings of those around us. All good Christians know that no sinfulness or wickedness is stronger than God’s Grace, to which we should strive to respond with our own love.

[Bienenhalde]

I think you have to be Christian to qualify as protestant.

JW and LDS reject Nicene Creed, they ain't Christians, so they ain't Prods.

I don't know whether Restorationists and Non-Demoninationalists reject Nicene Creed, but if they do, they ain't Prods neither.

What about denominations that say they only follow the Bible and not creeds but happen agree with everything in the Nicene Creed anyway?