In the end times. The end of the world. Obviously, that does not refer to any period in the first millenium.
I believe that there were always believers who had faith, some did meet in gatherings (in weakness) outside of the Roman Catholic church. But many were bound up under the Catholic churches enforced worship and under fear and great darkness. I also believe that Mystery Babylon Mother of harlots, is connected with the Roman Catholic Church, though the roots go way back to the source of confusion and false religion and stems into Rome and many assemblies today. She (the Romand Catholic church) had many daughters from her. And many denominations trace a connection. But this great confusion or Babylon and false woman has captured many of God's people and yes true believers are in this Babylon. God says to his people to come out of it.
The exact time of when believers began to be captured in these religious forms and confusion can be argued. But there has always been God's people through out all ages. In the last days it gets worse and a great falling away and departing from the faith and jesus says will he find faith?
and in the Ot days we see similar, Gods people were taken Captive in babylon and they also were in bondage in Egypt for a time.
Oh dear, I hope we are not going to descend into speculations about non-existant proto-Protestants somehow surviving outside Constantinian domination. These invariably make recourse to attempting to characterize sects which most Protestants would find repulsive, and which were nothing like Protestantism, such as the Paulician Gnostics, as being somehow proto-Protestant.
I already answered that above.
On the contrary, there is. We see a direct prophecy of the Christian temple in Ezekiel. Because the Millenium refers to the current period stretching from Pentecost until the present, the cruciform Temple shown to St. Ezekiel is obviously the Christian temple or church building..
No it doesn't. The Jewish temple and the issues of endtimea etc are not in any way saying we should call a man made building or temple the church. That is confusion. The temple in Ezekiel is not the man made church building or temple
The Eucharist, as celebrated in the Holy Orthodox Church, is not a shadow. It is the actual body and blood of our Lord.
Well, I strongly disagree and according to scripture it doesn't exist and there are other great concerns with anyone worshipping bread and wine as God.But that would be about a 70 page post in another place.
If you understood what the true supper is and that the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, and the inward life is where we know Christ and eat his flesh and drink his blood. You may say differently. Even the Ot saints did eat the same spiritual meat and spiritual drink 1 Cor 10. And that it is the word of God that is quick and powerful and that men eat this word, and live by it. This word is Christ and the truth , the true Light shining inwardly in the heart.
Because God became man and was crucified and risen, the use of icons to depict the Incarnate logos is not only permissable but required. Anyone who does not salute the icons is anathema according to the Seventh Ecumenical Council.
This is a grievous thing you say here and almost another gospel. Almost worship of images . These images are not even the Lord or mary or the saints etc. But even if they were I believe Paul would rip his clothes and say Nooooooo! stop.
To even separate from others over that, wow. Such error in my understanding of scripture. I would have to stand in doubt of any who would put such a anathema upon others for not salute the icons. I do not salute them so according to your offesive judgment I am anathema for not doing so. You just anathematized the vast majority of believers who cannot and will not bow down, or salute some picture of person as if it is a holy relic.
The carnal ordinances and outward type of the law were done away in the new Covenant. Thos who worship God must worship him in Spirit and in truth.
This one issue is very grievous to hear and the way your councils see it.
They certainly are. The icons of the Orthodox church are visual expressions of the Gospel, of equal theological importance to the scriptural text itself. We also adorn our Evangelion, or Gospel book, with icons of the Lord and the four Evangelists.
You almost speak another gospel and dare make then equal to scripture, wow. This is almost similar to me as scapulars for salvation.
To much correction to get into here for this issue. Another post maybe
The Jewish temple was an icon of our Lord; indeed, the showbread and drink offerings prefigured the Eucharist.
No they don't. The shewbread figured the 12 tribes of Israel and as believers paul said we being many are one bread. This also has a type of the communion of the body in Christ as one body. The passover lamb signified the death of Christ and the whole supper was a shadow and type of that salvation. The blood of the lamb was the figure of the death of Christ shedding his blood also the cup Jesus drank figured that blood.
In like manner, the Orthodox Christian Temple is also an icon of our Lord, for two reasons: it contains the faithful, whose bodies are Temples of the Holy Spirit, and it contains the Eucharist, which in our Church is the true body and blood of our Lord.
No there is no such thing in the New testament for gentile believers, ( or the Jews for that matter).
This is all just more of your made up stuff, with no scripture at all.
This is inaccurate. In addition to meeting in homes, they met in synagogues, in the Roman catacombs, in cemetaries, at the burial places of the Holy martyrs (for example, the graves of St. Peter and St. Paul in Rome), and occasionally, in purpose built buildings, such as the aforementioned churches in Kerala and Dura Europos.
No they met in homes for the ministry breaking bread, fellowship prayer continuing in the apostles doctrine gifts etc. They met in other places for various reasons. But the primary order and apostolic order from God was to meet in homes as the apostle Paul set the same order in every church. We see many churches in homes all over the New testament writings. This was by God's design and as the apostles were led to do so. Unless you want to say they were not led by God to do so, which iI believe they were.
I don't need one. Sola scriptura is a Protestant error, an overreaction on the part of Martin Luther to various Roman Catholic excesses.
Did I say sola scripture in my discussion? I believe the rule of our faith and practice is to live in Christ in the spirit and to be led by him and the Spirit gave forth the scriptures so that second witness will always be in line with the leading of the Spirit inwardly. Also we need the body of Christ where Jesus Christ is working in every part as they wait on hm and are led by the Spirit in edifying one another. This three fold aspect is vital. 1. God working in every believer to make them perfect unto every good work and teaching all things, 2 The Holy scriptures that are given by God through the body 3 the body of believers who corporately express the life and gifts and ministry of Christ and love to each other in the Spirit.
I never said sola scripture. For the scripture without the new birth and inward leading of God in the Spirit are unknown. Thos who claim to make scripture their only rule may be at times like the Pharisees who thought they knew the scripture but did not know the Lord right in front of them. But those who claim to have the Spirit to walk and disregard scripture are also not in the light. Because if they speak not according to the scripture there is no light in them. And those who say they have the spirit and scripture but not connected to other believers or draw from the body to be edified by Christ in all, are also disjointed and in danger of forsaking the body ministry in Christ and not wise.
It shocks me that you would consider the first conversion of a nation to Christ to be in any sense erroneous.
I am not talking about peoples conversion, the Lord knows the reality of all who believe. But I am speaking about the spurious claims in history by certain men and how the religious groups try to attach themselves to such things for credibility etc.
Our Lord said, "by their fruits ye shall know them."
And some have fruits that would anathematize believers for not saluting a man made icon of a person that is not even the real person. This is not good fruit for any to anathematize any for such things.
The fruit os the Spirit also do not speak lies and call a man made building a church or temple. Believers in jesus speak the truth no matter how hard it may be to do so.
What fruits has Armenian Christianity yielded? The conversion of another nation, Georgia, to Christ, and the largest number of Christian martyrs from a single event (the Turkish genocide of 1915), in human history.
Now you are blanketing a large group of believers over a long history of revivals and salvations. You sound uncharitable here and this is not good fruits you show. I could spend the next 20 years typing all the good things many believers have done in America and Canada. It would be a massive text unending.
In your effort to attempt to deny what I am saying, to pivot to criticizing "temple," an alternate term I condescended to supply you with owing to your concerns regarding Church, you have inadvertantly contradicted Scripture, which on numerous occasions refers to the Jewish Temples, which were built by men, as Temples.
No God also rebuked them for wanting a temple and one man to rule over them as a king. But he allowed both for a time. Today we see these two error magnified everywhere. We see Popes and one man pastors over all, and the large babylonian type edifices unbiblically called churches everywhere. The same type of errors.
The temple of the OT was temporary and allowed by God but he did say this
Acts 7:49
"Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house willye build me?..."
the pharisees and many Jews like many believers today cried out about the greatness of the temple and Stephen rebuked them for it. They made it more than it was we read similar things here
Jeremiah 7:4
Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, Thetemple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord, are these."
"27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?' ( 1 Kings 8:27)
"66 Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest? 2 For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the Lord: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word."( Isaiah 66;1,2 KJV)
The entire old Covent with its temples and sacrifices and carnal ordinances was fading away decaying ready to vanish Hebrews 8.
Dura Europos uses the plan of a Basillica and predates St. Constantine.
A church meeting in a house again, as i have been saying. Not the large basilicas of Constantine that became so called churches.
This statement suggests to me you have no real, in-depth knowledge of sacramental, liturgical services, if your characterization of them is limited to "a man on an exalted platform wearing long robes and following a program."
Wrong I was a Roman catholic for many years. I am fully aware of the details of the so called liturgy and service. I chose to word it as i see it scripturally and the men exalted over others as Lords controlling the believers on a platform. I do not want to call them priest, or ministers of Christ. I do not want to call the platform they are exalted on a altar or sacrificial place etc. No altar was to have man made steps up to it and all OT sacrifices and altars are done away in the new covenant
That is certainly the most banal and unedifying description of the Divine Liturgy I have ever encountered.
Or , as my brother Paul did, I will use great plains of speech and tell it like it is. I don't see your so called liturgy as a good thing in any way. I could be m,such more severe and rebuking in my tone. But I choose to be gracious here. Those were my gracious words.
On the contrary, the entire Orthodox liturgy is derived from 1 Corinthians 11, Matthew 28:19 and other vital passages. Nearly every word sung is from Scripture.
no it is not.
What you describe as a mode of worship originated with George Fox and the Quakers in the 16th century. Nowhere is it taught in the New Testament. You can't reconcile it to the New Testament pattern of worship (which continues unchanged in Holy Orthodoxy).
No, I teach what I do from scripture. Clearly shown. The order ministry of the body, where they met how they met what they did when they met. What the church is and the function of the church etc etc. I have planted with others many home meetings and seen the wonderous order of God among them many times and for many many years.
And though some groups in history seemed to get closer to the order of God and waiting on the Lord this is a good thing. The Quakers, ( though I do not agree with all their ideas) , did have many aspects of this order understood to some degree. Robert Barkleys writings on the Light of Christ water baptism and the communion of the body and blood of Christ and worship would be unanswerable by you and your group. I suggest you consider reading them. Before you criticize them. If you have read them, then that is another talk for another post.
The Divine Liturgy is not a "one man lecture type of assembly."
It is a on man as the priest ritual even worse than some so called "pastors" who dominate over others with their prearranged sermons to the time clock
Whereas the "one man lecture type of assembly" as you describe it is essentially a Protestant innovation of the 16th century, your preferred alternative is a 17th century innovation.
No the one man pastor ministry over all as a controller and master type of character stems from the one man priest over the catholic Church. The duties of the pastors were similar to the priest and many thing and baggage the reformers brought from their mother the Catholic Church. The reformers are to be commended for some of the branches they lopped off but not so much for the things they retained and brought into the reformation.
I prefer worshipping in the manner of the 1st century.
No you seem not to. I have been describing the home meetings in fellowship and ministry of the body and a meal together as a love feast and many other aspects of the first century home meetings and you attack it in defence of your superstructure of man made traditions that are contrary to scripture on almost every point.
The Eucharist, the priesthood, et cetera, are clearly described in the New Testament. Even the words presbyter (which was rendered into English as Priest) and Eucharistos.
No presbyter is a group of elders. The early church had elders ( plural) in every church ( singular) And they were not to have dominion over others but to be helpers. Overseers not overlords as many are today. The verse ,"not that we have dominion over your faith but are helpers" the word dominion means to control, as supreme in authority, as a master in title. But this is exactly what many try to have over others today. Jesus said the rulers of the gentles have dominion over them and they that are great are over them in authority, but it shall not be so among you. The believers are to be as servants in oversight and ministers. A servant has no authority in the world as a king does. But with God they do. The authority is in the Spirit in the word of God as they speak it and live it.
The Spirit is not quenched in the Orthodox liturgy. In our liturgy, the Spirit descends upon bread and wine and transforms them into the actual Body and Blood of our Lord.
Just saying something unbiblical doesn't make it so for you. The Spirit is quenched in every believer there who cannot be led at any time in revelation , prophecy, doctrine exhortation in the use of any gifts from God and testimonies. Instead they are all quenched by the religious ritual and all on a tight time frame. This is not the liberty of the Spirit and where the spirit of the Lord is there s liberty.
Many have a form of godliness but deny the power, from such we are to turn away. The power is the power of the Spirit.
The church ministering in the Spirit doesn't wait for bread to become the body of the Lord, they are the body of Christ and he is their head as they are led by him and as he effectually works in every part to build his church. Ephesians 4:15,16
"15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." ( Eph 4:15,16 KJV)
When I talk to you I sadly feel like i am talking to someone of a entirely different religion than the scriptural church and saints of God.
