DENOMINATIONALISM (Open to All)

[Yeznik]

Good post. I highly regard and respect the Orthodox Church. For instance, their theory of what Catholics call purgatory is very well thought out. I don't really know if the Orthodox have a word for that other than it being a "re-education" process.

I also highly regard and respect the depth of theology of the Orthodox Church and its history. I had thought about converting myself at one time, but the legalism just seemed a stumbling block.

Example, the rules of iconography are just as much man-made rules as the Pharisees created. Rather than keeping it simple and to the point like saying that an icon is a lesson in picture, not to be idolized.

I stumble over any branch of Christianity when tradition becomes so entrenched and inflexible that it is treated like law. That is when tradition is a prison and a burden, and it smacks of Pharisaism, not Jesus.

I'm also highly offended by the Russian Orthodox Church persecuting Evangelicals. Christians are persecuted. Christians do not persecute.

Icons were used before Saint Canon of the Camera and Saint Kodak of the Film came along.

 

[Koey]

And the Pharisees came along before Jesus too. I don't care when something came along. Legalism and living by rules is still just that, a Christianized version of Pharisaism.

 

[izarya]

Roger, I'm puzzled by your naivité. All churches believe the Bible. The problem comes when they believe it says different things. For instance:

Baptists believe from the same Bible in the literal interpretation of the Greek word baptizo (immerse). Others say this is only half the truth, because even in the Bible baptizo is used in a non-literal sense, to wash.

Catholics believe from the same Bible that the keys to the kingdom were given to Peter and hence to Rome, and hence to the successors of the Roman bishops. Others believe from the same Bible that the keys to the kingdom are given to the spiritual successors of Peter, all true believers.

Orthodox Christians believe from the same Bible that they are the oldest Christian church, and continue the true faith.

Pentecostals believe from the same Bible that their tongues are the same tongues as in the Bible, and that those who do not make speaking in tongues a dogma of their faith are not up to date with what God is doing today.

Calvinists believe from the same Bible that specific people were designated for hell from the beginning. Arminians and Catholics believe from the same Bible that all humans will have a free choice in such matters.

I could go on. It's not as simple as your comment implied.

This reminds me of something I read at blogspot.

In the book of Philippians 3:2 Paul writes, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision." Now the word concision here is usually taken as a reference to no more than those Jews at the time who were pressing the Gentile converts to be circumcised, as this is the general gist of the opening of the chapter.
Closer examination and reflection however will reveal the deeper underlying message in this statement. The archaic definition of the word Concise is "cut off," or "cut apart." This can easily be mistaken as a reference to circumcision alone at first glance, as circumcision is a "cutting off" so to say; but this is only the surface meaning. The deeper message here, in accordance with the message of unity is, "Beware of clicks and schisms from within! (dare I say denominations?)" Why? Because the proper usage of the word "cutting" in the context used here is a reference to a part being cut off from a main body. The TRUE church is the Body, as taught in 1 Corinthians 12:12. All things within the body are supposed to work together toward the One and same goal. All I have said thus far is supported by 1 Corinthians 12:25, "That there should be no schism in the body: but that the members should have the same care one for another."
When we view the church as a "body," we could very well compare each of us individually to "cells." Cells in groups make up tissue, tissue in groups make up organs, organs in groups make up systems. To be healthy, a body needs all systems to work properly, efficiently, and in accordance with one another in working toward and achieving the One and same goal. This cannot be achieved when there is schism, or division within the cells and members. This is cancer!
Cancer is characterized by uncontrolled division of cells and the ability of these cells to invade other tissues, either by direct growth into adjacent tissue through invasion or by implantation into distant sites. Cancer is a rouge group of cells or tissues which separates ("segregates") itself and forms its own entity within the larger system of the body. In a sense, cancer has its own separate identity like a parasite that infests a host organism. Cancer uses the body's life-force, or energy to survive in much the same manner that the various denominations, and groups draw from and use the veil of Christianity to gain the heart and minds of those that fall victim to them. Like any parasite, cancer is a drain upon the resources of the host organism.

 

[Forest]

Nothing to forgive! Your comment is a reasonable response and I appreciate your mature willingness to discuss the topic without merely storming off and calling me an idiot for expressing an honest opinion.

My reply is that I do not find icons themselves to be stupid. They are very useful as illustrations of biblical events. I find that limiting icons to only a certain style of art, and only a certain facial flat-faced, unnatural perspective, to be legalistic. I do not believe that such rules need to be made.

As far as the extreme example of icons of Martin Luther King dancing with Malcom X goes, I still don't believe we need a rule, just a decision by someone with some sense, that that is not appropriate. An extreme does not prove that a Pharisaic list of rules need to be made, only that common sense needs to prevail.

Rules about how icons are to be made is not really legalsim. I have spent many years in a legalist church where there are many rules about what a person can and cannot do, otherwise people believe their salvation is in question. Rules about icons do not directly affect people.

 

[Koey]

Well I suppose that's where we disagree. To me, making rules about what kind of icons a church may display is exactly that, legalism. It constricts peoples' faith to a set of man-made rules about the "correct" artistic style. This narrowmindedness has nothing to do with religion. It is a silly human restriction that only masquerades as correct religion. Jesus came to free us from lists of do's and don'ts. True religion is found in looking after the poor and keeping ourselves unspotted from the world, not in lists of rules made by men restricting freedom of artistic religious expression to an outmoded form of art that looks completely unnatural.

As wonderful as Orthodoxy is in its theological depth and understanding of holy scripture, this overly restrictive aspect of iconography is one glaringly human fault. It only smacks of Pharisaism not the religion of Christianity's founder, Christ.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Many Orthodox believe they are the one true church because they are the oldest and that Protestants are apostate. Many Catholics believe they are the one true church because of Peter and that Protestants are apostate. Many Saturday sabbatarian churches believe they are the one true church and that Catholics and Protestants are the harlot and daughters of the harlot of Babylon. Many Pentecostal and Charistmatic churches believe they are spirit-filled because of tongues and other churches are deficient in Spirit and disobedient. Many Baptists believe that they are the ants pants because of tee totaling and immersion. On I could go...

However, most mainstream churches agree on the essentials of the faith such as: -

1. the teachings of Jesus
2. the teachings of his apostles
3. the value of the Old Testament
4. at least 5 of the first 7 Ecumenical Councils including
5. the canonization of the New Testament
6. the Nicene Creed (ex. filioque) and the Apostles' Creed
7. the addition of Christmas around 300 or so
8. the change of Easter (Christian Passover) from a date on the Hebrew calendar to a Good-Friday/Easter-Sunday celebration

Those things that divide are sometimes labeled as dogmas, sometimes not. Some dogmas only became so within the past century, others are very old.

Can the essentials above be improved upon? What can we do about the division? How can we foster unity? Do dogmas apart from the essentials above, often cause more problems than they are worth? Are they really necessary, or are they more important than unity?

Some of my thoughts....


1. Denominations don't have a heart, soul or mind. They can't believe, teach or do anything. IMHO, ALL Christians are people and only people can be Christians. I do not share the obsession with institutions and denominations that exists with my Catholic and Mormon friends.


2. Christians - together - are the communion of saints, the mystical union of all believers, the "one holy catholic and apostolic church."


3. Christians are permitted to assoicate with each other and to come into community with each other. This is not forbidden, in fact, it's mildly encouraged in the Bible. People come together into Bible studies, cell groups, fellowship groups, and on a grand scale, congregations. There are examples of this in the NT itself. They do so typically for the purposes of mutual edification, cooperation, support and accountability. These communities may take on institutional aspects, but the institution is not the church - the Christians are.


4. While they are not mentioned in the NT and while the Bible is silent on this issue, I believe it is not forbidden for congregations to also associate with each other in what we technically call "denominations." Denominations are to congregations as congregations are to individual Christians. They are an association, a community of congregations that come together for mutual edification, support, cooperation and accountability. While not commanded or forbidden in Scripture, I think they are allowed and I think they generally are a good idea. I'm generally in favor of community, cooperation and accountability.



My $0.01


Thanks for the discussion!


Pax!


- Josiah



.

 

[Oblio]

I'm also highly offended by the Russian Orthodox Church persecuting Evangelicals.

You mean by not allowing them to prostyletise the faithful when the Church is recovering from a century of persecution ? Unless they are there to aid the Orthodox Church under her direction, evangelicals have no business being in Russia or any other Orthodox country,

To me, making rules about what kind of icons a church may display is exactly that, legalism. It constricts peoples' faith to a set of man-made rules about the "correct" artistic style.

Would you allow any Bible to be used in your church ? The mormon bible, the JW bible ? Canons concerning iconography are there to protect the word of God from 'artistic' style that corrupts them. Icons are not 'art', any more than the Bible is literature subject to rewriting to suit the whims of the editor who interprets it.

 

[Koey]

You mean by not allowing them to prostyletise the faithful when the Church is recovering from a century of persecution ? Unless they are there to aid the Orthodox Church under her direction, evangelicals have no business being in Russia or any other Orthodox country,



Would you allow any Bible to be used in your church ? The mormon bible, the JW bible ? Canons concerning iconography are there to protect the word of God from 'artistic' style that corrupts them. Icons are not 'art', any more than the Bible is literature subject to rewriting to suit the whims of the editor who interprets it.

Well there's where we disagree again. Christians are persecuted; they do not persecute. Who's business is it of yours if someone else proclaims Jesus. Jesus had no problem with it; but apparently you do.

Art is not religion. How one person depicts Jesus is not the church's business. There you go from preaching to meddling. Or should I be more blunt? The church has no business raping the faith of its followers!

 

[karen freeinchristman]

Unless they are there to aid the Orthodox Church under her direction, evangelicals have no business being in Russia or any other Orthodox country

It's not the country that is Orthodox, though, is it?
In England, the Church of England (i.e. Anglican) is the Established Church. We don't go around saying that no one else can proselytise in the UK, though. In fact, we have even allowed the existance of Russian Orthodox churches here!

 

[Koey]

It's not the country that is Orthodox, though, is it?
In England, the Church of England (i.e. Anglican) is the Established Church. We don't go around saying that no one else can proselytise in the UK, though. In fact, we have even allowed the existance of Russian Orthodox churches here!

Yes, the Church of England did once persecute Catholic Christians, and then Catholics in their turn persecuted English Protestants. Thankfully, England has repented of the evil, and neither church persecutes the other. It seems that some of that persecution or terrorism still exists among certain Orthodox leaders in Russia. As much as I respect the theology of the Orthodox church, this is NOT orthopraxy. It is just plain evil behavior.

 

[prodromos]

It is just plain evil behavior.

Koey, there is plenty of evidence to show that missionaries going to Russia went not just with the intention of bringing Christ to the unchurched in Russia, but also of converting Orthodox christians to their own faith.

Read the following document from the Southern Baptist Church North American Mission Board:

Witnessing to People of Eastern Orthodox Background

YWAM had a similiar attitude with their evangelisation efforts in Greece for the Athens Olympics (http://www.operationgideon.org/)

The Church in Russia is recovering from near obliteration by the Communists, having produced more martyrs for Christ than the first centuries of the early Church combined. Yet rather than supporting the existing Church in their efforts to bring Christ to the flock entrusted to them, Western evangelists saw it as an opportunity to win converts to their particular denominations, obviously regarding Orthodoxy as a corruption of the true faith.

The shepherds in Russia are greatly reduced in number and have little strength but they are doing everything in their power to protect their sheep from the thieves. And you call them evil? What do you call the sheep stealers then?

John

 

[Oblio]

Art is not religion. How one person depicts Jesus is not the church's business.

Iconography is Tradition, as much as Holy Scripture is. Do you support people meddling with the Holy Bible ?

There you go from preaching to meddling. Or should I be more blunt? The church has no business raping the faith of its followers!

Then why do you support Protestant missionaries in Orthodox lands ?

 

[Yeznik]

Regarding the Russian Orthodox Church and Protestants.

One must delve into the history of Russian for the last several hundred years. After the fall on Constantinople, the new EO headquarters was Russia. During the beginning and through communism there were millions and millions of Russians sent to Siberia to “work for Mother Russia”. A lot of these Russians that were sent to Siberia to “work” were clergy. I have heard many stories of the KGB coming in the middle of the night knocking on a person door saying they need to take an “important trip”. I actually know of an Armenian Priest who was approached with the “proposal” but by the Grace of God he was able to get out of it. So a lot and I mean a lot of Russian clergy as sacrificed their lives for the sake of their flock then turning into atheists. So after the persecutions of the communism, enters the Protestant. Protestantism is a foreign idea to the Russian (and Armenian) people. There was no Martin Luther in Russia, or any type of Reformation. So when the Protestant entered into Russia and started preaching, the Russian people were left dumbfounded, being that most of Russia is EO. The Protestants are trying to convert people who are already Christian. So what happens is that the EO Church in Russia classifies the Protestants as heretics and having a foreign religion, which is contrary to the Eastern Orthodoxy. In the West Christianity is loosely defined as anyone who reads the bible and believes in Jesus. This is not the same understanding in the Eastern world.



So here is the problem, the Russian are Christian, what are the Protestants doing in Russian trying to convert Christians?


Can you image a bunch of Russian Orthodox priest coming to the American belt states and telling the bible belt states that they need to convert to Christianity?

 

[a_ntv]

So here is the problem, the Russian are Christian, what are the Protestants doing in Russian trying to convert Christians?

The same the protestant evangelism does in Mexico and south America: trying to convert Christians.

 

[Koey]

Regarding the Russian Orthodox Church and Protestants...I have heard many stories of the KGB coming in the middle of the night...The Protestants are trying to convert people who are already Christian. So what happens is that the EO Church in Russia classifies the Protestants as heretics and having a foreign religion, which is contrary to the Eastern Orthodoxy...So here is the problem, the Russian are Christian, what are the Protestants doing in Russian trying to convert Christians? ...Can you image a bunch of Russian Orthodox priest coming to the American belt states and telling the bible belt states that they need to convert to Christianity?

1. The KGB persecuted Orthodox Christians, so why does the Russian Orthodox church employ KGB techniques to persecute others?
2. I don't care if Russian Orthodoxy is bigoted against other Christians, that gives them no right to persecute.
3. I presume Russian Orthodox listen to Jesus. Jesus told his disciples not to harm anyone who preaches his name, even if they are of a different group.
4. I don't believe that ANY Orthodox priest would claim that ALL Russians are Christians at all. Most Christian churches prefer to convert those who are not Christians, rather than steal from other churches.
5. Protestants often change churches, and nobody persecutes them for it. That is not the business of the priests if someone chooses another church. The priests need to keep their noses out of peoples' private affairs.

Bottom line? Christians are persecuted; they do not persecute. If the Russian Orthodox Church is persecuting people, they need to repent and ask God for forgiveness of this gross sin.

 

[prodromos]

1. The KGB persecuted Orthodox Christians, so why does the Russian Orthodox church employ KGB techniques to persecute others?

Are Protestant missionaries really being dragged out of bed at midnight and shot dead or being forced to work themselves to death in labour camps in Siberia . I had no idea.

2. I don't care if Russian Orthodoxy is bigoted against other Christians, that gives them no right to persecute.

And I'm sure your church would just welcome hordes of Mormon missionaries in your area. That is how different these Protestants beliefs appear to that which they have received from their fathers.

3. I presume Russian Orthodox listen to Jesus. Jesus told his disciples not to harm anyone who preaches his name, even if they are of a different group.

[bible]Luke 9:49-50[/bible]I believe you are reading an awful lot into this passage that isn't there.

4. I don't believe that ANY Orthodox priest would claim that ALL Russians are Christians at all. Most Christian churches prefer to convert those who are not Christians, rather than steal from other churches.

You are either ignorant or extremely naive. None of the Protestant missionary groups in Russia make any attempt to work with the Orthodox church established there. Did you read the document I linked to in my last post?

5. Protestants often change churches, and nobody persecutes them for it. That is not the business of the priests if someone chooses another church. The priests need to keep their noses out of peoples' private affairs.

Yet another reason why Protestant christianity is so alien to the Orthodox. We are exhorted to hold fast to the teachings we were given, not change whenever we wanted.

Bottom line? Christians are persecuted; they do not persecute. If the Russian Orthodox Church is persecuting people, they need to repent and ask God for forgiveness of this gross sin.

[bible]Acts 20:28-31[/bible]

 

[Koey]

"Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." "I believe you are reading an awful lot into this passage that isn't there." What's not to see?

"29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. 31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears." Does this allow the Russian Orthodox Church to burn down the churches of other Christians? Or, is this simply saying that in your teaching, teach against heresies? I believe the latter and that the former, which the Russian Orthodox Church has reportedly done, is sin!

Sorry, but I don't believe that the Russian Orthodox Church, as much as I respect its theology, is behaving in a Christ-like manner in this regard. It is behaving more like the wolf than the gentle shepherd.

 

[prodromos]

Witnessing to People of Eastern Orthodox Background

Did you read it Koey?

 

[a_ntv]

Sorry, but I don't believe that the Russian Orthodox Church, as much as I respect its theology, is behaving in a Christ-like manner in this regard. It is behaving more like the wolf than the gentle shepherd.

Here an other exemple:
Catholic community in former Soviet State lives in fear of fanatics (See: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=7876)

Witnessing to People of Eastern Orthodox Background

A wonderfull text that explain the actual differences of the Orthodoxy (and in doctrine also Catholicsm) vs the Baptist faith. A very good analisys and clear presentation.

The big problem is that aim of this text: to detroy the correct doctrine to teach lots of mistakes.

And the bigger problem is the way: not directly, but in secret, step after step, joking on the un-educated believers.

But personally I think that the Russian Church has to wake up. To presume that all Russians shall be orthodox only because they are Russian, is the worse possibile mistake. The Catholic Church has already done it 30 years ago in South America with terrible results.

So the Orthodox shall not paint the faith of nationalism: the nationalism is an ideology, and cannot give the people the deeper answers. Only a true prayer can.

 

[Koey]

Excellent comments! The western church was a murderous church for part of its history. I highly respect the pope for his repentance and apologies about this dark part of Catholic history. The Protestant church has also committed murders in its history, in Anglican England, Calvinist Switzerland, Puritan America, etc. I highly respect those Protestant churches which have repented of their sordid pasts and apologized.

I always respected Orthodox Church history, because rather than retaliating against their persecutors as did the western church, they suffered persecution gladly. Now the Russian Orthodox Church has become the persecutor. I hope that their Orthodox brothers in other countries will resoundly condemn this modern blot in Russian church history and urge them to also repent.