Christian History in 15 minutes

That's actually not too bad.

Meester-Chung said:

Click to expand...

Hey I liked it! You could make a denomination out of that.

Man is never content enough to just do as we are told by God, but driven to analyse why. It puts us back in the drivers seat and we've stolen the vehicle. Stick to caring for each other as commanded while He takes care of the rest.

How quickly it became an unfruitful olive tree

timothyu said:

How quickly it became an unfruitful olive tree

Click to expand...

Nonsense. The only unfruitful aspect is the enduring schisms which began with Byzantine and Frankish politics and which were exacerbated by later corruption in the Roman church leading to the Reformation and Counter-Reformation (nothing like that has ever happened in the Christian East, which are neither Reformed nor counter-Reformed, because the constant fruit of martyrs we bear under Islamic and Communist persecution results in us not having the time for schism and heresy).

@Meester-Chung

Thank you for your lovely posts; out of curiosity are you of the same Evangelical Catholic disposition as my LCMS/LCC friends @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian ?

The complexity with the Ecumenical Councils is that the Oriental Orthodox as they are now known were falsely accused of Monophysitism by Ibas, a crypto-Nestorian, when in fact their Christology was merely that of St. Cyril; conversely, the accusation one finds among some OO extremists (I’ve only really seen it from Armenian nationalists and Ethiopian monastics) that the Eastern Orthodox are Nestorians is also in error. Also while the Church of the East did come under the influence of Nestorian-aligned scholars from the School of Antioch who self-exiled to Nisibis, (and there is some evidence to suggest they exploited what was perceived as a minor theological dispute by some, in order to avoid persecution by the Sassanid Persian regime), during the time of Mar Babai the Great, the Church of the East renounced Nestorian Christology in favor of a Syriac translation of Chalcedonian Christology (which some people argue was still Nestorian, however, Nestorianism was expressly renounced by Catholicos Mar Dinkha IV, memory eternal, in 1974, although he spoke only for the Assyrian Church of the East, but given the cordial relations that existed not only between his church and the Syriac Orthodox, but between the Ancient Church of the East under Catholicos Mar Addai II, memory eternal, and the Syriac Orthodox , it seems likely this sentiment also exists in both groups. Certainly St. Isaac the Syrian, a monk of the Church of the East venerated by all four communions - the Church of the East, the Oriental Orthodox, the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, did not exhibit any trace of Nestorianism in his writings (although in recently translated texts by Sebastian Brock, we do see a belief in Apokatastasis, that was known to be popular in the Church of the East in the late first millenium; this belief also appears in the Book of the Bee, by Mar Solomon of Basra. However this belief is also no longer mainstream among the Church of the East.

Uh, Christianity was meant as an insult. It means "little Christ." And guess what? Jesus was Jewish. I know, this is shocking to hear for some people. But don't worry, because Jesus is still Jewish. You could make a religion out of this...

All Becomes New said:

Uh, Christianity was meant as an insult. It means "little Christ." And guess what? Jesus was Jewish. I know, this is shocking to hear for some people. But don't worry, because Jesus is still Jewish. You could make a religion out of this...

Click to expand...

Where do you find the idea that "Christian" means "little Christ"? The word "Christian" is formed from the title "Christ" and the suffix "ian" which comes from the Latin for "of" or "belonging to."

All Becomes New said:

Uh, Christianity was meant as an insult. It means "little Christ."

Click to expand...

Wrong. In Latin “Little Christ” would be “Christulus.” The Latinate -ian format from which the word “Christian” was derived meant “followers of” or “belonging to” Christ, in Greek the -ianos format as heard in Antioch where the Believers were first called Christians and recorded in the New Testament with no critical commentary (Acts 11:26) it could also mean “little Christ” but not in a literal diminutive but rather an associative diminutive format, in that in calling us Christians, they are saying we are followers of or little Christs in Greek, which is accurate, because that is literally what being a disciple of Christ is - to be a follower of Him, to seek to become by grace what He is by nature.

And guess what? Jesus was Jewish. I know, this is shocking to hear for some people. But don't worry, because Jesus is still Jewish. You could make a religion out of this...

Click to expand...

According to inheritance, yes, however, Jesus Christ abolished the practice of Second Temple Judaism and established the New Covenant, his Ekklesia or Church, the belief in which we confess in the Nicene Creed, which I would assume you agree with (since the Nicene Creed is the normative definition of Christianity in its Constantinopolitan 381 recension).