Why are Catholics and Orthodox treated differently by protestants?

[PlatinumTrophies]

The answer to that question depends on what you mean by "ALL". We do know that Christ reveals the Father. We also know that the Old Testament reveals all one needs to know for salvation. However, I don't think one can say that one can learn ALL one needs to know from scripture, Old and New, alone. In fact, that isn't even scriptural. Which leads to:


I certainly respect that kind of zeal. It's very important that it is kept.
However, it should be tempered by knowing that one can't learn what all the scriptures mean all by themselves.
In Acts chapter 8 there's a story of a man who was reading the scriptures alone and we have the following exchange, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?”
We all need guidance on our spiritual journey.

As mentioned in my first post in this thread; I grew up in an Independent, Fundamental, KJV Bible ONLY church that was about as anti-Catholic as one can ever be. Jack Chick tracts were my "comic books" when I was a middle schooler.
My journey to Orthodoxy began in that church.
It took me 40+ years to finally come home to the Church began by Christ and His Apostles. The church that the book of Acts records the beginnings of. The one that the NT epistles were written to. The one that assembled the oral tradition of Christ on earth into the four Gospels. I can think of no better place to take guidance from.
I hope and pray that some day you find your way home as well.

I grew up in the SBC, but I was exposed to Jack Chick's stuff as well. What do you think was the first thing that started you on the path to Orthodoxy? For me it was the dissatisfaction with how independent Bible Churches made Christianity a religion based on people's opinions on the Bible. I had no confidence in the competing theologies of free will vs predestination. I was also drawn by the physical beauty of Orthodox churches, since American Bible churches are horrendously ugly. The ROCOR parish I first visited had very fiery members, which appealed to me since I didn't like the lukewarmness of my childhood SBC church.

 

[Tigger45]

I grew up in the SBC, but I was exposed to Jack Chick's stuff as well. What do you think was the first thing that started you on the path to Orthodoxy? For me it was the dissatisfaction with how independent Bible Churches made Christianity a religion based on people's opinions on the Bible. I had no confidence in the competing theologies of free will vs predestination. I was also drawn by the physical beauty of Orthodox churches, since American Bible churches are horrendously ugly. The ROCOR parish I first visited had very fiery members, which appealed to me since I didn't like the lukewarmness of my childhood SBC church.

For my understanding. Would you define how you are using fiery as very devoted?

 

[RobNJ]

For my understanding. Would you define how you are using fiery as very devoted?

That IS how I read it.... As far as I know, there's not much spontaneous combustion, among O'dox congregants.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Also, English speaking peoples had alot of more anti-Catholic propaganda, it was part of their nationalism for centuries, and this just didn't exist in Germany or Scandinavian countries to the same extent.

That's certainly another very good point I neglected to mention. I'm sure this was a factor somewhere - perhaps it was a big part of the reason for the development of the issues I mentioned.

 

[~Anastasia~]

For my understanding. Would you define how you are using fiery as very devoted?

That's always a good question.

I wouldn't necessarily use the word "fiery" for many Orthodox I know (many of them are lifelong Orthodox and now elderly) ... but they are certainly deeply rooted in their faith, completely devoted, very pious.

Then again I know younger ones I would describe as "fiery" ... though often converts. I actually appreciate what converts too bring to the Church as they are inspired to zeal by their great love of the faith that cradles sometimes just take as a given. Not everyone has had the opportunity to be raised with such a depth of spiritual wisdom and treasury of theological knowledge. Though the zeal often needs to be tempered in most of us. Lest the "fire" we bring with us burn down our houses lol.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I recommend investigating the history of Christianity from reliable, non-conspiracy theory, sources. I find the Orthodox views on the New Testament to be far superior to the protestant ones I grew up with. Of course it is difficult for some people to put aside the biases they've been exposed to.

This is good advice. I grew up hearing a great deal of what turned out to actually be propaganda, and it wasn't until I determined to put aside my biases and learn what Catholics actually believe. (I still disagree on some points, but at least now I know why I believe what I do and how it actually agrees and disagrees with Catholicism instead of the wrong information I was taught.)

Protestants are rarely taught anything about historic Christianity prior to the Reformation (unless it's just a lump "Catholicism was bad and Luther opposed it" scenario). Most don't even realize that Catholicism was only a part of Christianity, and of later development (compared to the Apostolic and early period). (And I realize Catholics themselves will likely disagree on this point, since they see unity under the Pope as the criteria for being the Church and trace themselves to the beginning as well - so hearing from only Catholics can further confuse anyone trying to learn the truth.)

This is said for @Gregory95 as well. Hi, Gregory!!!





By the way, @PlatinumTrophies, please forgive my lateness. I've noticed you in the forums and been wanting to welcome you to CF and to TAW! We are very glad that you've joined us! I've been very remiss in my posting in the last couple of weeks due to "life". And it's not even Great Lent yet! (This place sometimes gets quiet during the Great Fast.)

Determining if Sola Scripture is something you want to believe in is a good first step. You have shown signs of believing Sola Scripture.

While Orthodox often say we do not believe in sola scriptura, it's rather interesting to me because the real problem is that many Protestants no longer actually believe in "sola scriptura" as delivered by Luther. Luther was actually very closely in line with what Orthodoxy teaches. Luther taught that Scripture was a primary authority, but must be understand within the context in which it was developed (i.e. the early Christian Church). We would say the same.

Many Protestants today actually believe in something that would be more rightly termed "solo scriptura" ... scripture alone apart from its historic understanding, and they are taught to cut it out from its context within Tradition, which unfortunately allows each person to reinterpret it for himself, leading to a fractured theology.

Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick has a good discussion on it, though he can be a tad polemical. I really like his treatment of "faith alone" even more.

The Magisterial Reformation - Part 1a - Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy | Ancient Faith Ministries

https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/orthodoxyheterodoxy/the_magisterial_reformation_part_1b

 

[Tigger45]

That IS how I read it.... As far as I know, there's not much spontaneous combustion, among O'dox congregants.

Funny and I know you are joking but in Orthodoxy it does actually happen and it could be the person next to you and you would never know it by looking with natural eyes.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I am on here to seek the truth nothing more I have no imagination that I know everything nor am above error

I can not know what I don't know without being shown what I don't know

Actually I love the humility in this statement.

You're right that we can't know unless someone shows us. And Christianity has become SUCH a complex landscape with many voices going in different directions that it's best to take as much time as you need to study things out. I'm sure God is patient and helps sincere seekers in this process. And remember that having perfect theological knowledge isn't what saves us. It's a great help in the end to find the true path though so I'm not saying we shouldn't seek knowledge! But I'm just wanting to commend you in seeking and saying it can take some effort.

I too would recommend looking at the early sources. We have the Scriptures of course. But it's good to see what the early Church was saying about and alongside the Scriptures (before they even became Scripture!). I wouldn't go willy-nilly into the gnostic writings (those have been recognized as dangerous since they were introduced) ... but would rather look to the Apostolic Fathers (who were many of them taught by the Apostles themselves or their direct descendants) and other early leaders of the Church - Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, etc.

And you're still fairly new to the site as well - welcome to CF! We are always glad to have you join us in TAW (The Ancient Way) as well.

Please feel free to ask if you have any questions we might be able to help you with, especially as regards early Christian history. While this forum (TAW proper) does not really allow debate, we have a subforum set up just for debate, if that is helpful to you.

St. Justin Martyr's Corner: Debate an Orthodox Chr

And if you need help as far as the site itself, let us (Ambassadors) know, or any of the members may often be able to help as well.

God be with you.

 

[FenderTL5]

What do you think was the first thing that started you on the path to Orthodoxy?

twofold. First, I think that as a youngster, being familiarized with the bible and its stories and a respect for those things was beneficial.
Then there was the time when I was in 6th or 7th grade that we had a guest in my Sunday School class. He read from his bible that wasn't KJV. After the teacher stressed the importance of using the perfect Word of God, from 1611; I raised my hand and asked, "What was the Bible in 1500?" Not getting a satisfactory answer, I decided to research it on my own.

There were many more mile markers in my journey, but that was the beginnings.

 

[FireDragon76]

twofold. First, I think that as a youngster, being familiarized with the bible and its stories and a respect for those things was beneficial.
Then there was the time when I was in 6th or 7th grade that we had a guest in my Sunday School class. He read from his bible that wasn't KJV. After the teacher stressed the importance of using the perfect Word of God, from 1611; I raised my hand and asked, "What was the Bible in 1500?" Not getting a satisfactory answer, I decided to research it on my own.

There were many more mile markers in my journey, but that was the beginnings.

They believe God could perfectly preserve the Word of God as authorized by a 17th century quasi-Reformed monarch who used religion as much as an instrument of politics as spirituality, but that God could not also preserve a succession of bishops from the time of the apostles. Go figure.

 

[Gregory95]

This is just a few in only one chapter

My question is this if the following dose not show Christ told us all we NEED to know then

What did Christ miss that He didn't speak of that is needful to know?

John 6:28-29

The will of God is to believe the ones He sends

God sent Christ His Word

Christ said if you believe Me you do as I say

Christ tells us how to have eternal life

I don't understand what more is needed

I could agree there is more one could learn as with the rest of the NT and history etc that is not the Gospel

But is not the Gospel sufficient to know salvation


John 6:27 labor for the meat that endures unto everlasting life that CHRIST gives you

John 6:28-6:29

Also note John 6:44

As for those who read the Word of God from the Gospel and yet can't know Christ

Christ said no man can come to Me EXCEPT the Father which HAS sent Me DRAWS him

Dose not John 6:45 show us that if you heard and learned of the Father you come to Christ

To come to Christ is to do as He says IF you believe

Remember John 6:46

Only Christ has seen the Father who better to give us instruction then who not only has seen the Father but IS OF the Father for Christ is the Word of the Father

John 6:47 he who BELIEVES on Christ HAS EVERLASTING LIFE

John 6:48 Christ IS the bread of EVERLASTING LIFE

John 6:63 it is the SPIRIT that quickeneth the FLESH profits NOTHING

the words Christ speaks are SPIRIT and they are LIFE

John 6:65 no man can come to Christ except it is given to him by the Father

John 6:68 CHRIST has the words of eternal life

I fail to see what more is NEEDED then Christ

If I'm missing something please be kind enough to show me

Those in the ancient world (Israeli Jews, Ethiopian Jews) still have their minds closed on who the Suffering Servant of Isaiah is. They have such a strong image of a Davidic king who conquers the world that this passage dumbfounds them.

-

Although in some circles, at least parts of Judaism teaches that there are actually two Messiahs. Not just the conquering Messiah ben David. But also a Messiah ben Joseph who precedes him.

Messiah ben Joseph - Wikipedia

Messiah ben Joseph, like Joseph the son of Jacob, is meant to suffer and is the Suffering Servant in Isaiah. Once he was killed, Messiah ben David appears and takes vengeance for his death and destroys Messiah ben Joseph's enemies, and then establishes his kingdom.

They don't see that Messiah ben Joseph and ben David are actually one and the same. And Messiah ben David DID come back and take vengeance on his enemies. He is the risen Christ, and the temple was destroyed just as he said, and Israel stripped of their inheritance, just as he did. "Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place." They were the very murderers of Messiah ben Joseph, and even according to their own teachings, deserved destruction.

And to this day, like Judah and his brothers, they do not recognize the face of their brother Joseph, who saves the world from Famine and is a king over them. And they won't know until he feels it's appropriate.

 

[Gregory95]

I recommend investigating the history of Christianity from reliable, non-conspiracy theory, sources. I find the Orthodox views on the New Testament to be far superior to the protestant ones I grew up with. Of course it is difficult for some people to put aside the biases they've been exposed to.
Determining if Sola Scripture is something you want to believe in is a good first step. You have shown signs of believing Sola Scripture.

What is defined as Sola Scripture

Do I believe the Bible is true

Yes

Do I believe there is other important information out there yes

Do I believe the Gospel is not sufficient to find out how to obtain salvation

Well since Christ told us how to have eternal life I would have to disagree on that

 

[ArmyMatt]

What is defined as Sola Scripture

Do I believe the Bible is true

Yes

Do I believe there is other important information out there yes

Do I believe the Gospel is not sufficient to find out how to obtain salvation

Well since Christ told us how to have eternal life I would have to disagree on that

no one said the Bible is insufficient, but I have to ask were the Christians lacking anything between Pentecost and when the first words of the NT were penned? which was almost 20 years by the way.

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

This is just a few in only one chapter

My question is this if the following dose not show Christ told us all we NEED to know then

What did Christ miss that He didn't speak of that is needful to know?

John 6:28-29

The will of God is to believe the ones He sends

God sent Christ His Word

Christ said if you believe Me you do as I say

Christ tells us how to have eternal life

I don't understand what more is needed

I could agree there is more one could learn as with the rest of the NT and history etc that is not the Gospel

But is not the Gospel sufficient to know salvation


John 6:27 labor for the meat that endures unto everlasting life that CHRIST gives you

John 6:28-6:29

Also note John 6:44

As for those who read the Word of God from the Gospel and yet can't know Christ

Christ said no man can come to Me EXCEPT the Father which HAS sent Me DRAWS him

Dose not John 6:45 show us that if you heard and learned of the Father you come to Christ

To come to Christ is to do as He says IF you believe

Remember John 6:46

Only Christ has seen the Father who better to give us instruction then who not only has seen the Father but IS OF the Father for Christ is the Word of the Father

John 6:47 he who BELIEVES on Christ HAS EVERLASTING LIFE

John 6:48 Christ IS the bread of EVERLASTING LIFE

John 6:63 it is the SPIRIT that quickeneth the FLESH profits NOTHING

the words Christ speaks are SPIRIT and they are LIFE

John 6:65 no man can come to Christ except it is given to him by the Father

John 6:68 CHRIST has the words of eternal life

I fail to see what more is NEEDED then Christ

If I'm missing something please be kind enough to show me

Orthodox believe scripture is sufficient for making us wise unto salvation, and for making us completely furnished unto good works.

 

[FenderTL5]

Orthodox believe scripture is sufficient for making us wise unto salvation, and for making us completely furnished unto good works.

Absolutely!

(truncated)

My question is this if the following dose not show Christ told us all we NEED to know then
What did Christ miss that He didn't speak of that is needful to know?
...If I'm missing something please be kind enough to show me

First my disclaimer; I could be misunderstanding you and that would make me wrong. I've been wrong about many things in my life so this wouldn't be the first.

Looking back through your responses I see you keep stressing the "all we NEED to know.." part. As if you are looking for the minimum.
I suppose that in a place untouched by the scriptures it is possible that one can learn "all they NEED to know" from reading nature.
However, for those of us that have been given so much more, I don't think the bare minimum is what we should be striving for.

Christ came, not only that we have Life, but life abundantly. The Church is Christ's Body on earth. We have to live as Christ's body on earth. In order to do that we have to live as Christ and IN Christ, not just know what the things written about Him in scripture says. We will fall short and the Church addresses that as well.
Again, maybe I misunderstand your point but memorizing/knowing every word in the Old and New Testaments won't do what the Grace of God does when there's a living, active, participatory Faith in Christ.

 

[straykat]

Sorry for getting annoyed above. It wasn't directed at anyone, but still. I must've woken up on the wrong side of bed today. All of my posts this morning have been the same.

 

[Gregory95]

It was just misunderstanding my friend I don't mean to those of us who have more information advalable shouldn't look at it I just meant we are seeking truth and Christ revealed all that we must do to be saved not that we should stop at that just its all we need

Absolutely!

(truncated)

First my disclaimer; I could be misunderstanding you and that would make me wrong. I've been wrong about many things in my life so this wouldn't be the first.

Looking back through your responses I see you keep stressing the "all we NEED to know.." part. As if you are looking for the minimum.
I suppose that in a place untouched by the scriptures it is possible that one can learn "all they NEED to know" from reading nature.
However, for those of us that have been given so much more, I don't think the bare minimum is what we should be striving for.

Christ came, not only that we have Life, but life abundantly. The Church is Christ's Body on earth. We have to live as Christ's body on earth. In order to do that we have to live as Christ and IN Christ, not just know what the things written about Him in scripture says. We will fall short and the Church addresses that as well.
Again, maybe I misunderstand your point but memorizing/knowing every word in the Old and New Testaments won't do what the Grace of God does when there's a living, active, participatory Faith in Christ.

 

[Gregory95]

no one said the Bible is insufficient, but I have to ask were the Christians lacking anything between Pentecost and when the first words of the NT were penned? which was almost 20 years by the way.

I would say they needed nothing more then faith in Christ and the faith means following Christ

Would it be beneficial for them to have had more information of course I don't deny that

But they didn't need anything more for Christ is sufficient

 

[ArmyMatt]

I would say they needed nothing more then faith in Christ and the faith means following Christ

Would it be beneficial for them to have had more information of course I don't deny that

But they didn't need anything more for Christ is sufficient

what more information?

 

[Gregory95]

what more information?

I have no idea what information they had or if anything from those who walked with Christ in the flesh wasn't revealed until they wrote the Gospels

I was not there

I know they believed in Christ and followed Him this is all that matters

as I've said my friend Christ told as all we need to know

any other information as long as it is truth is beneficial but one dont need it to get to heaven

If you want me to name this information I can't as the majority of my study is the NT not because I don't wish to learn anything else but rather the amount of information of truth in the NT 4 years in and I still stumble across things I've previously missed it also helps me in remembering in case I think or i hear something I believe is contrary to NT I can refer to it and find out the truth

Is this wrong?