Because "Christ's_Warrior" wasn't clear about the separation of the Assyrian Church of the East from the rest of Christendom, I shall explain a little. They have been often called "The Nestorian Church", they rejected the Council of Ephesus (431) and thus the title "Theotokos". Though they say they are not Nestorian, and there have been more recent Christological agreements between their Church, the Catholics and the Orthodox, they still venerate Nestorius as a saint.
I don't think we split off, we were labelled heretics and persecuted for our Christology (whole different topic), if you know anything about our Church, our people have been persecuted for our beliefs in Christ for the past 2000 years (it continues today in Iraq). No other Church has as many martyrs for our belief in Christ, I wish i was worthy enough to receive the same honour.
Yes I agree with you that we do not need to invoke the prayers of the saints, but as I have demonstrated with many quotes and Bible verses, it was a common practise and as long as the fine line of honour to worship is not crossed then I believe it is fine to do so.
Another thing, we are disrespectful towards one another and we do not show love towards one another and this is from Satan himself.
I would like to rebuke you all with love and ask you all in Jesus' name to love one another, respect one another and edify one another. Some people here have been boasting about their gifts, but if you have not love you are dead.
I love you all, God bless you all and may our Lord and Saviour be with you always.
I would, however, make the comment that the overriding point is well made with your post. Acorn-to-oak type thinking has led to all sorts of things. Evidently ACE, then OO, then EO all "stopped" in their doctrine making. RC seems to continue.
In the year I've been around CF, you're the first poster I know of to ever identify themselves with the Assyrian Church of the East. Oddly in a different thread in GT in the last week, I mentioned your church (ACE) as splitting before OO. And here you are.
Don't take the word 'splitting' offensively, as I tried to indicate that all the others have too. No one of course thinks of themselves that way
As to your cites, they've all been dealt with, so rather than rehash, you may want to review the thread.
I would, however, make the comment that the overriding point is well made with your post. Acorn-to-oak type thinking has led to all sorts of things. Evidently ACE, then OO, then EO all "stopped" in their doctrine making. RC seems to continue.
Thanks, yes a little different but the same. As I said, love each other in Christ.
Jn 17:21-23 said:That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, as we also are one: I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me.
I have highlighted and/or underlined the key turns of phrase.Glad you bring up Polycarp.
or (as it is in the old Latin translation) “nor offer up the 1. supplication of prayer to any other person; for as for Jesus Christ, we adore him, as being the Son of God, but as for the martyrs, we love them, as the disciples and imitators of the Lord.” So that 2.they plainly exclude the saints from any sort of religious worship, of which prayer or invocation was always esteemed a very considerable part.
Works of Dr. John Tillotson, Late Archbishop of Canterbury. Vol. 04. | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
As I mentioned above, you have not demonstrated this assertion, only stated your inference based upon presupposition.So great. We're in agreement. No invoking the deceased. What those asleep in Christ may or may not do, we may leave as a mystery because we do not know.
Why is THAT important to you? Is diversity of worship and praxis within the Christian populace something you'd like to eradicate?I'd like the rest of the Body of Christ to agree as well.
I have highlighted and/or underlined the key turns of phrase.
Point 1.
If we are to trust the translator from Latin, what is being said is that prayers as to a deity are not to be offered to those who are not. This short passage neither states nor infers that petitions to departed Saints are verboten.
Point 2.
Because of an a priori, unspoken presupposition that all petitions made of a Saint are de facto prayers to a deity, you and the late Archbishop presume that this quote supports your premise- when in fact, it neither supports or denies your premise. A singular quote from any author, scriptural or not, is insufficient to support a complex premise.
Nothing "plainly" is revealed IRT this issue, irrespective of what you or Tillotson opine.
As I mentioned above, you have not demonstrated this assertion, only stated your inference based upon presupposition.
Why is THAT important to you? Is diversity of worship and praxis within the Christian populace something you'd like to eradicate?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?