Most reliable method of preserving doctrine?

[Montalban]

How does a non-denom maintain the truth?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Nice one. You've not answered it on ANY thread.

Well, start that thread: "Why Does No Denomination on the Planet Agree with Mine on What Is And Is Not Scripture" and I promise to post in it (even though - as I indicated - it's not a concern of mine and frankly I honestly don't know why it troubles you Orthodox so much).





.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Well, start that thread: "Why Does No Denomination on the Planet Agree with Mine on What Is And Is Not Scripture" and I promise to post in it (even though - as I indicated - it's not a concern of mine and frankly I honestly don't know why it troubles you Orthodox so much).
.

It would seem it troubled them enuf to come out of Roman Catholicism

http://www.christianforums.com/t6790703/#post43066817
Great Schism and effect on Christianity and Theology

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

It would seem it troubled them enuf to come out of Roman Catholicism

http://www.christianforums.com/t6790703/#post43066817
Great Schism and effect on Christianity and Theology

I don't think so, they left the RCC (becoming the first Protestants?) because they protested the Holy Father inserting a word into the Creed. At least I think that was the excuse given at the time (excuses give are seldom the whole story, I've found - so I suspect their was more). I don't think their disagreement with the Church on what is or is not Scripture mattered then (I don't know if it even does now).

What do YOU think? What method to YOU think is the most reliable in preserving a teaching? Do you think the owners of my apartment complex were wise to use a written contract was good or what should have been done instead?



.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I don't think so, they left the RCC (becoming the first Protestants?) because they protested the Holy Father inserting a word into the Creed. At least I think that was the excuse given at the time (excuses give are seldom the whole story, I've found - so I suspect their was more). I don't think their disagreement with the Church on what is or is not Scripture mattered then (I don't know if it even does now).

What do YOU think? What method to YOU think is the most reliable in preserving a teaching? Do you think the owners of my apartment complex were wise to use a written contract was good or what should have been done instead?.

Depends on how much of was in small fine print

http://www.christianforums.com/t7556428-2/#post57407298
New Movie: "Forks Over Knives" proves the validity of the biblical plant based diet.

Young) Galatians 6:11 Ye see in how large letters I have written to you with my own hand;

 

[Montalban]

Well, start that thread: "Why Does No Denomination on the Planet Agree with Mine on What Is And Is Not Scripture" and I promise to post in it (even though - as I indicated - it's not a concern of mine and frankly I honestly don't know why it troubles you Orthodox so much).

.

The thread would more likely be called "What's the basis for Protestants following Scripture?" (oh, there's one running like that!)

 

[Montalban]

Depends on how much of was in small fine print

Funny, because Protestants claim that the Papacy was an addition, now you're witness to a Protestant saying we left the church because someone flexed additional power.

But of course this is just a continuation of the theory of debate called "I can't prove my point so I'll try find problems with your side"

 

[Montalban]

I've started a thread called Protestant Canon.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Funny, because Protestants claim that the Papacy was an addition, now you're witness to a Protestant saying we left the church because someone flexed additional power.

But of course this is just a continuation of the theory of debate called "I can't prove my point so I'll try find problems with your side"

Don't know.
That is for you and Rome to hash out....I am just an innocent bystander in all of this

http://www.christianforums.com/t7488024/
What particular type of Primacy ought Rome to be accorded

 

[Montalban]

Don't know.
That is for you and Rome to hash out....I am just an innocent bystander in all of this

http://www.christianforums.com/t7488024/
What particular type of Primacy ought Rome to be accorded

I was trying to be kind, and to suggest that you don't put too much in store with armchair historians, especially when they miss the irony.

When a Protestant is making claims about us leaving the RCC because the Pope inserter a line it makes for irony given that same inclusion is ACCEPTED by Protestants.

It just doesn't make sense. Rejecting the Papacy and trying to poke fun at our church for doing exactly that (although we didn't break away) combined with the fact that the very issue he's making fun of is one that Protestants accept!

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I was trying to be kind, and to suggest that you don't put too much in store with armchair historians, especially when they miss the irony.

When a Protestant is making claims about us leaving the RCC because the Pope inserter a line it makes for irony given that same inclusion is ACCEPTED by Protestants.

It just doesn't make sense. Rejecting the Papacy and trying to poke fun at our church for doing exactly that (although we didn't break away) combined with the fact that the very issue he's making fun of is one that Protestants accept!

Sometimes this is weird....

The comment I BRIEFLY replied to was whether the EO left the church over the issue of what IS and IS not Scripture (a point both disagree with all others about). I simply said that I don't think so, the issue as far as I know largely centered on the Catholic insertion of a word into the Creed (although I admitted I thought there was more to it). Take offense at that if you want - but read my signature line.

I'd LIKE to get back to the issue: What is the better was to preserve a teaching: by writing it down or by trying to raise one from the dead and cross examine them (the two options currently under discussion)? I gave my opinion.




.

 

[Dorothea]

It would seem it troubled them enuf to come out of Roman Catholicism

http://www.christianforums.com/t6790703/#post43066817
Great Schism and effect on Christianity and Theology

Yeah, except it was the RCC that broke off from us because of adding things that weren't there from the beginning, imo.

Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine this we left the RCC. It's what has been taught in the USA and other Western countries, but I don't believe it to be true.

 

[Montalban]

Yeah, except it was the RCC that broke off from us because of adding things that weren't there from the beginning, imo.

Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine this we left the RCC. It's what has been taught in the USA and other Western countries, but I don't believe it to be true.

It's because Protestants deal in terms of the Papacy. They understand it's a matter of them reacting against 'the church' so everyone else dealing with the Papacy has also reacted to 'the church'. It actually gives some credence to the RCC, by making them 'the church'.

 

[Montalban]

Sometimes this is weird....

And, ironic

 

[ivebeenshown]

I'd LIKE to get back to the issue: What is the better was to preserve a teaching: by writing it down or by trying to raise one from the dead and cross examine them (the two options currently under discussion)? I gave my opinion.

What kind of strawman is your 'second option' there?

I think the best way to preserve a teaching is by God's Spirit working through whatever means he chooses, and I believe that means is Holy Scripture and Apostolic Tradition, where Apostolic Tradition is understood to include a succession of certain governmental offices.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

What kind of strawman is your 'second option' there?

I think the best way to preserve a teaching is by God's Spirit working through whatever means he chooses, and I believe that means is Holy Scripture and Apostolic Tradition, where Apostolic Tradition is understood to include a succession of certain governmental offices.

May I respectfully ask how that applies to the office of the Cardinals in Roman Catholicism? Just curious

http://www.christianforums.com/t7513246-10/#post56115952
Why does chrisitianity need two infallible leaders?

Originally Posted by Fireinfolding

​

 

[Montalban]

Is that football team the cardinals? I thought they were a baseball team

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

I believe that means is Holy Scripture and Apostolic Tradition, where Apostolic Tradition .

Thank you.

Could/would you do the following?


1. Write here (in clear, objective, black-and-white words) the content of this "Apostolic Tradition." Thanks. I'm curious to see things like Supreme and Infallible Roman Pontiff, Purgatory, Original Sin, Transubstantiation, Immaculate Conception of Mary as Dogma so I can show it to our Orthodox friends just for starters. Let's see it. If you could, each part ascribe it to which Apostle(s) wrote it/taught it - when and where. Thanks.

2. Please tell me how many of the 50,000 denominations (some Catholics keep insisting exists) accepts that EXACT content.


3. Please tell us how this is MORE than or EQUAL to Scripture in all the following areas so as to be above or on the same level as it: Inspired by God, reliable, objectively knowable by ALL and alterable by NONE, ecumenically embraced by 50,000 or so denominations, embraced historically from 1400 BC.


Thanks!




.

 

[joyfulthanks]

subscribing

 

[Rhamiel]

Yeah, except it was the RCC that broke off from us because of adding things that weren't there from the beginning, imo.

Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine this we left the RCC. It's what has been taught in the USA and other Western countries, but I don't believe it to be true.

wait in western countries say the east broke off and in eastern countries they say the west broke off
ohhh lol yeah totaly unbiased
the innovations that the EO have come up with over the years really are amazing, you want to have your cake and eat it too, you add new traditions other innovations and yet pretend like you have not changed