Why no unity?

[OneWithGod]

People don't have the same Truth of God, because most "Christians" are not being led by the Holy Spirit, but by their own selfish reason and desires of what they want the "truth" to be.

 

As long as people will not die to themselves (their selfishness), they cannot be led to God's Truth. God's Truth is to convicting to the sinful self and self will always protect itself to keep surviving.

 

Selfishness (the sinful heart) will always desire to believe lies instead of God's real Truth. Before a person can believe God's Truth, they have to want to die to all the evil in them first.

 

The reason so called "Christians" are not united and of one accord, is because most are only willing to believe what their ears are itching to hear.

 

For the most part, "Christians" don't really desire to live righteously and by the power of believing God's Truth and Holy Spirit. Their selfishness just desires to be convinced that they aren't going to hell. The just desire to save themselves - instead of giving their life to God for His glory and goodness.

 

The trouble with all these "Christians" is - they are only fooling themselves. Most peoples "truth" is usually only lies that they have convinced themselves to be " their truth".

 

Now days, every "Christian" has a different "truth". There are as many different "truths" as there are personal opinions.

 

God's real Truth is in His Word, but only a FEW will desire the real Truth. Only the few will desire to be made fully righteous by God's Grace and Holy Spirit's Baptism. Only a few will desire to be free of all their sin. Only a few will even have the faith that they can be made fully sanctified by God's power. God desires this full salvation of all and He has made it available to all - but they have to truly disire God's righteousness to receive His righteousness and be fully transformed.

[Guest shiloh357]

People don't have the same Truth of God, because most "Christians" are not being led by the Holy Spirit, but by their own selfish reason and desires of what they want the "truth" to be.

 

As long as people will not die to themselves (their selfishness), they cannot be led to God's Truth. God's Truth is to convicting to the sinful self and self will always protect itself to keep surviving.

 

Selfishness (the sinful heart) will always desire to believe lies instead of God's real Truth. Before a person can believe God's Truth, they have to want to die to all the evil in them first.

 

The reason so called "Christians" are not united and of one accord, is because most are only willing to believe what their ears are itching to hear.

 

For the most part, "Christians" don't really desire to live righteously and by the power of believing God's Truth and Holy Spirit. Their selfishness just desires to be convinced that they aren't going to hell. The just desire to save themselves - instead of giving their life to God for His glory and goodness.

 

The trouble with all these "Christians" is - they are only fooling themselves. Most peoples "truth" is usually only lies that they have convinced themselves to be " their truth".

 

Now days, every "Christian" has a different "truth". There are as many different "truths" as there are personal opinions.

 

God's real Truth is in His Word, but only a FEW will desire the real Truth. Only the few will desire to be made fully righteous by God's Grace and Holy Spirit's Baptism. Only a few will desire to be free of all their sin. Only a few will even have the faith that they can be made fully sanctified by God's power. God desires this full salvation of all and He has made it available to all - but they have to truly disire God's righteousness to receive His righteousness and be fully transformed.

And you are in a position to judge the spiritual state and heart motives of "most Christians?"  Since when were you given the divine insight to judge the heart of another person?

[OneWithGod]

 

People don't have the same Truth of God, because most "Christians" are not being led by the Holy Spirit, but by their own selfish reason and desires of what they want the "truth" to be.

 

As long as people will not die to themselves (their selfishness), they cannot be led to God's Truth. God's Truth is to convicting to the sinful self and self will always protect itself to keep surviving.

 

Selfishness (the sinful heart) will always desire to believe lies instead of God's real Truth. Before a person can believe God's Truth, they have to want to die to all the evil in them first.

 

The reason so called "Christians" are not united and of one accord, is because most are only willing to believe what their ears are itching to hear.

 

For the most part, "Christians" don't really desire to live righteously and by the power of believing God's Truth and Holy Spirit. Their selfishness just desires to be convinced that they aren't going to hell. The just desire to save themselves - instead of giving their life to God for His glory and goodness.

 

The trouble with all these "Christians" is - they are only fooling themselves. Most peoples "truth" is usually only lies that they have convinced themselves to be " their truth".

 

Now days, every "Christian" has a different "truth". There are as many different "truths" as there are personal opinions.

 

God's real Truth is in His Word, but only a FEW will desire the real Truth. Only the few will desire to be made fully righteous by God's Grace and Holy Spirit's Baptism. Only a few will desire to be free of all their sin. Only a few will even have the faith that they can be made fully sanctified by God's power. God desires this full salvation of all and He has made it available to all - but they have to truly disire God's righteousness to receive His righteousness and be fully transformed.

And you are in a position to judge the spiritual state and heart motives of "most Christians?"  Since when were you given the divine insight to judge the heart of another person?

 

I wouldn't call it "judging" as you do, because most would consider "judging" to be condemning people to hell - this is only God's right.

 

But, with the Holy Spirit living in me, I have been given the ability to clearly evaluate peoples fruit and motives. This usually takes some time with each person, but my calling of God has taken me to many "Christians" - to try to bring back His Truth - the complete Truth of the New Testament - not the "truth" that most desire to hear, but the real Truth of God.

 

I have been filled with His "Spirit of Truth". So, yes I am in a position to evaluate other people's beliefs against God's real Truth. I know this sounds prideful in this day of un-belief, but God still filles the ones desiring His righteousness with His Truth and righteousness. This is open to any that truly desire His fullness and oneness with God.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

 

But, with the Holy Spirit living in me, I have been given the ability to clearly evaluate peoples fruit and motives.

 

That is a bunch of baloney.  You don't know beans about most Christians.  We are filled with the Holy Spirit too and you are in no position to say otherwise. It is not just prideful.  Prideful doesn't cut it.  Judging requires you to judge people's hearts and motives and frankly, you haven't been given that kind of insight despite your delusional thoughts to the contrary. 

[Hippie333]

OnewithGod - maybe you could please explain as to what exactly is "the real truth" ? I would appreciate as much attention to detail as possible if you please.

 

 

Thanks,

Hippie333

[other one]

People don't have the same Truth of God, because most "Christians" are not being led by the Holy Spirit, but by their own selfish reason and desires of what they want the "truth" to be.

 

As long as people will not die to themselves (their selfishness), they cannot be led to God's Truth. God's Truth is to convicting to the sinful self and self will always protect itself to keep surviving.

 

Selfishness (the sinful heart) will always desire to believe lies instead of God's real Truth. Before a person can believe God's Truth, they have to want to die to all the evil in them first.

 

The reason so called "Christians" are not united and of one accord, is because most are only willing to believe what their ears are itching to hear.

 

For the most part, "Christians" don't really desire to live righteously and by the power of believing God's Truth and Holy Spirit. Their selfishness just desires to be convinced that they aren't going to hell. The just desire to save themselves - instead of giving their life to God for His glory and goodness.

 

The trouble with all these "Christians" is - they are only fooling themselves. Most peoples "truth" is usually only lies that they have convinced themselves to be " their truth".

 

Now days, every "Christian" has a different "truth". There are as many different "truths" as there are personal opinions.

 

God's real Truth is in His Word, but only a FEW will desire the real Truth. Only the few will desire to be made fully righteous by God's Grace and Holy Spirit's Baptism. Only a few will desire to be free of all their sin. Only a few will even have the faith that they can be made fully sanctified by God's power. God desires this full salvation of all and He has made it available to all - but they have to truly disire God's righteousness to receive His righteousness and be fully transformed.

I would like to meet any ten people in this world that agree on everything that God's word says.  I've been here for nearly ten years and read hundreds of people across the world and have not seen even two.  Show me just ten out of the 7 billion of us, please.

[Thaddaeus]

Shiloh357,

 

 

That is not a fair analogy as there are no mainstream authentic Christian denominations that reject the incarnation or deity of Jesus.

As I stated, you use the same words but the meanings, even if there are meanings are far from the same.  One's theology explains if they understand the Incarnation or they do not.  Most Protestants do not understand the Incarnation, tney have no salvfic content in using the word.  You don't even hold to the ontological extension of that Incarnation in that Christ is present in this World through His Church, a physical real Church here on earth.

 

 

 

Right, but that is an essential doctrine and Hymenaeus was a heretic.  That doesn't reflect the secondary doctrinal issues and traditions that Christians of various persuasions might differ on.  Augustine wrote, "Around the essentials, unity, around the nonessentials liberty, and in all things, charity."  There is room for differnces without those differences leading to disunity.

we are not speaking of secondary, but primary. Since you brought up Augustine he bequeathed to Protestants two erroneous doctrines, Original Sin notion and Predestination.

 

Those two have changed the entire landscape for Protestants.  It clearly defines a whole different Christ and plan of salvation than what the Bible teaches.

 

 

The difference here is that you are approaching this from the standpoint of apostolic succession and the presence of a magesterium that is presumably led by the Holy Spirit to tell everyone else what the Bible teaches.  Thus, everyone is supposed to be in unity around those teachings.  At least that is how it appears from this side of the computer screen.

 

definitely Apostolic Succession which is in the Bible. However, not magisterium, that is an RCC concept.  We use the Body itself over which Christ is the Head and the Holy Spirit elivens that Body through each member of that Body. The Gospel is held intact by the Holy Spirit. The fact that the Original Gospel has not changed is the historical witness to the power and work of the Holy Spirit. It was the Apostles that gave us the Gospel.  It is not given in bits and pieces to priests centuries later.  They are all teaching the very same thing as the Apostles.

Something no protestant can refer to since even Luther's ideas were changed even before he was dead. Same for Calvin. And it has been one man after another trying to impose his great insight into what scripture might mean.

 

 

 

Ah but it touches on doctrine, particularly holiness.

Holiness is NOT a doctrine, it is a state of being for a believer. It is the application of how we live IN Christ.

 

 

 

 

So, are you thus claiming that you have a perfect understanding the entire Bible and all it contains??

Did I ever state that I was the Church.  We are not speaking here of individuals, though that is the melieu of protestantism. When one speaks of a doctrine or practice it is inherently of that person and no other. But I think both Christ and the Holy Spirit have perfect knowledge of the Gospel. It was given to the Apostles completely, fully, and they imparted it to the early Church.  It is the Church, the Body through which the Holy Spirit works to preserve that Gospel and has done so for 2000 years.

 

 

 

No, I'm not.  I am talking about secondary issues, like differences the center on eschatology, or speaking in tongues or immersion in water vs. sprinkling, or whether or not it is a sin to drink alcohol.   I don't think that we as Christians differ on the Gospel at all.  "In Christ" is locative in nature.  It tells us where we are.  It doesn't carry the meaning or connotation of complete and aboslute doctrinal agreement.

Your secondary issues are all over the place.  Eschatology is a doctrine of the last things.  Tongues is a gift of the Spirit. Baptism is a sacrament. And drinking alcohol, a little on the legalistic side here.

 

 

It is only pertaining to ones spiritual walk which is based on knowing who is the Christ.  Not a Christ created by man's interpretation of which many have been created.  It is why there are Mormons, Jehovah Witnessess, Methodist, Calvinvist, Pentacostalist and hundreds more.  They all claim, I imagine, this relative "locative nature" though they are not of the same doctrines, thus different Christ, different ways to be saved, and probably for different reasons.

 

 

Our "unity" in Christ refers to our unity in terms of being joined together in Him as one body, as His bride. There are two ways to approach the term, "doctrine."   There are primary or essential doctrines about which there can be no compromise and which are established doctrines of the Christian faith.   The other way to approach the word, "doctrine" concerns issues about which the Bible doesn''t give us as much light like which rapture scenario someone chooses to believe, or whether or not one should be baptised by immersion or sprinkled.  Those are issues about which we can differ without shredding our unity to smithereens.

Again, you use common words but the meanings and application are as different as night and day.  There is no way protestants are united in the same Christ, since they understand Him differently based on the doctrines pertaining to Him.

 

All these doctrinal decisions were done 2000 years ago by the Apostles.  Do you really thing that the Holy Spirit for two thousand years still does not understand baptism?  Baptism, a sacrament, is essential and primary concept for a believer based on scripture and its use, practice and understanding from the very beginning.

 

These are problems for you but have never been a problem for Christians outside of the Protestant melieu.

 

 

 

I would be considered a protestant by you, but my experience has been that the incarnation, Trinity, etc. are all taught in protestant churches.  You cannont judge protestantism by your experience and the fact that you did not teach those things.

the words are taught. I used the words but I never taught any theological construct for them.  Being on forums like this has also shown that most, if not all, do not understand the Incarnation as it was believed, taught by the early Church and clarified by the Councils. Just to give you an example, Calvinism uses the word, but their theology is diametrically opposed to the Incarnation.  It is theologically impossible to hold to the Biblical Incarnation and also hold to Calvinism. But that is the norm for most doctrines. I might also add that most, if not all protestants hold to the doctrine of Original Sin which also opposes the salvfic purpose of the Incarnation and purpose of Christ redeeming the world.

 

 

And by the way, historically, the "unity" of believers as it was applied in the Middle ages and prior was "convert or die."   "Unity meant the unconditional acceptance of all church teachings upon pain of death.

you are immersed in to much Catholicism.  The Roman Empire in the east never had a Dark Ages or Middle Ages for that matter.

 

 

 

The only real difference is that the Catholic Church was de-clawed and de-fanged when the Bible was made available for the common man to read.

The Reformers may have somewhat declawed the Pope/Magisterium, but they clawed themselves to do exactly what the RCC was doing as an organization.  We know have thousands of little, individual popes, all claiming infallibiltiy with their personal interpretation of scripture.

 

 

Confessionn to priests, the real Presence in the Eucharist elements, indulgences, Purgatory and a host of other Church teachings were not biblical.

Again, most of the above only applies to the RCC, not the Orthodox.  As per scripture you should be confessing your sins to the whole congregation because that is what is prescribed.  Confession to the Priests came about because the confessions were used against them by those persecuting the Church and or civil disobedience. The real presence has always been scriptural, it is just one of those areas that Zwingli changed, thus all protestants.

 

 

 

When people were united under "the Church" it was at a time when the Bible was read in Latin and men were kept illiterate and at the mercy of priests who taught false doctrines as "Scripture."   So "unity" under one teaching wasn't really the best thing for Christians.  Your definition of unity is really control, manipualation and conformity of thought without question.  It's not unity. It's slavery and in one sense, idolatry.

Again all RCC.  Orthodox never spoke Latin. They spoke Greek exclusively for 900 years before the slavic language was added.

 

But the point is that we must be slaves to Christ.  I understand that you being a free, democatratic, western individualist finds it very hard to give up self, and to follow one.  You want to be saved, whatever that might mean to you, by your own means and way. You are comfortable with your self determined brand of "christianity".

[firestormx]

As I stated, you use the same words but the meanings, even if there are meanings are far from the same.  One's theology explains if they understand the Incarnation or they do not.  Most Protestants do not understand the Incarnation, tney have no salvfic content in using the word.  You don't even hold to the ontological extension of that Incarnation in that Christ is present in this World through His Church, a physical real Church here on earth.

 

<snip>

 

But the point is that we must be slaves to Christ.  I understand that you being a free, democatratic, western individualist finds it very hard to give up self, and to follow one.  You want to be saved, whatever that might mean to you, by your own means and way. You are comfortable with your self determined brand of "christianity".

You 2 have been getting me to do a lot of digging and searching out of the things you have been discussing in such detail. I don't know if I should say thank you or stop it,  .

 

I don't want the thread derailed and I am not ashamed to confess my lack of understanding of everything you are discussing, however would one of you in as much detail as possible in 1 post, please explain the difference between orthodox and protestant beliefs and how this effects biblical unity. That way everyone can be on the same page. Thank you, And please continue the conversation, I am enjoying it very much.

 

Thank you again and may God bless you all

Firestormx

Joseph

Edited August 23, 2013 by GoldenEagle

[Thaddaeus]

 

 

As I stated, you use the same words but the meanings, even if there are meanings are far from the same.  One's theology explains if they understand the Incarnation or they do not.  Most Protestants do not understand the Incarnation, tney have no salvfic content in using the word.  You don't even hold to the ontological extension of that Incarnation in that Christ is present in this World through His Church, a physical real Church here on earth.

 

<snip>

 

But the point is that we must be slaves to Christ.  I understand that you being a free, democatratic, western individualist finds it very hard to give up self, and to follow one.  You want to be saved, whatever that might mean to you, by your own means and way. You are comfortable with your self determined brand of "christianity".

You 2 have been getting me to do a lot of digging and searching out of the things you have been discussing in such detail. I don't know if I should say thank you or stop it,  .

 

I don't want the thread derailed and I am not ashamed to confess my lack of understanding of everything you are discussing, however would one of you in as much detail as possible in 1 post, please explain the difference between orthodox and protestant beliefs and how this effects biblical unity. That way everyone can be on the same page. Thank you, And please continue the conversation, I am enjoying it very much.

 

Thank you again and may God bless you all

Firestormx

Joseph

 

I would be glad to do this for you but I don't think it would be appropriate in this thread.  Even though the differences are paramount to the discussion to actually go over them is a dissertation of itself. However, to just list them or to give you a small glimpse of  the many differences I will do here.

Generally, the purpose of man's creation is different between Orthodox and most protestants and becomes an obstacle to understanding what it is that Christ expects from believers

The fall of man is about the consequence w hich was death. Physical death Gen 3:19, Rom 5:12.  It has nothing to do with the actual sin of Adam as Original Sin teaches. Man inherits a mortal nature which is the cause of his sinning proclivity. In other words man is NOT born a sinner, but mortal.

 

The purpose of the Incarnation, Heb 2:14-17 was Christ would assume a human nature from the Virgin Mary. He would assume a mortal nature in order that He could heal man who had suffered death through that same nature.  By assuming our nature, He raised our nature to life, an eternal existance for all of mankind, even the world, John 4:42. I Cor 15:12-22, Col 1:20,  II Cor 5:18-19, Rom 3:23-25, John 6:39 and others.

 

This eternal existance and the atonement of the sin of the world are the two works of Christ through His life, death and resurrection. Christians have always believed in the resurrection of the dead because Christ arose from the dead to give life to our mortal natures. I Cor 15:22, 53.  This is the great gift of mercy, love and grace that God through Christ gives to the world, to every human being. It is the free gift of His grace.

 

Because man now has life, an eternal existance which was lost due to the fall, Christ calls all men to repentance. God is calling all men to be united with HIm as man was created to be in this world.  To fulfil the created mandate of man to be prophet, priest and king over this creation and to bring the whole back to God as a living sacrifice.  Man is required to make a choice of either accepting God or rejecting Him. If we choose to be joined with HIm there are many obligations that must be met in order to attain to eternal life with Him.

 

The relationship between man and God is all tied up in the sacraments as to how that relationship will exist.  Protestants hold to just two and have changed the whole form, meaning and purpose of them.

The Orthodox rejects the theories of Original Sin, the Satisfaction theory of atonement, All things related to Calvinism from predestination, TULIP, to the tangents of them such as OSAS.  They do not recognize the definition of Church as protestants state it. They also reject the addition to the Nicene Creed of the filioque clause, "and the Son" thus changing the meaning of the Trinity which all protestants have taken from the RCC. They use the Liturgical form of worship. That is a start as there are other differences as well that mostly extend from these.

[firestormx]

 

I would be glad to do this for you but I don't think it would be appropriate in this thread.  Even though the differences are paramount to the discussion to actually go over them is a dissertation of itself. However, to just list them or to give you a small glimpse of  the many differences I will do here.

Generally, the purpose of man's creation is different between Orthodox and most protestants and becomes an obstacle to understanding what it is that Christ expects from believers

The fall of man is about the consequence w hich was death. Physical death Gen 3:19, Rom 5:12.  It has nothing to do with the actual sin of Adam as Original Sin teaches. Man inherits a mortal nature which is the cause of his sinning proclivity. In other words man is NOT born a sinner, but mortal.

 

The purpose of the Incarnation, Heb 2:14-17 was Christ would assume a human nature from the Virgin Mary. He would assume a mortal nature in order that He could heal man who had suffered death through that same nature.  By assuming our nature, He raised our nature to life, an eternal existance for all of mankind, even the world, John 4:42. I Cor 15:12-22, Col 1:20,  II Cor 5:18-19, Rom 3:23-25, John 6:39 and others.

 

This eternal existance and the atonement of the sin of the world are the two works of Christ through His life, death and resurrection. Christians have always believed in the resurrection of the dead because Christ arose from the dead to give life to our mortal natures. I Cor 15:22, 53.  This is the great gift of mercy, love and grace that God through Christ gives to the world, to every human being. It is the free gift of His grace.

 

Because man now has life, an eternal existance which was lost due to the fall, Christ calls all men to repentance. God is calling all men to be united with HIm as man was created to be in this world.  To fulfil the created mandate of man to be prophet, priest and king over this creation and to bring the whole back to God as a living sacrifice.  Man is required to make a choice of either accepting God or rejecting Him. If we choose to be joined with HIm there are many obligations that must be met in order to attain to eternal life with Him.

 

The relationship between man and God is all tied up in the sacraments as to how that relationship will exist.  Protestants hold to just two and have changed the whole form, meaning and purpose of them.

The Orthodox rejects the theories of Original Sin, the Satisfaction theory of atonement, All things related to Calvinism from predestination, TULIP, to the tangents of them such as OSAS.  They do not recognize the definition of Church as protestants state it. They also reject the addition to the Nicene Creed of the filioque clause, "and the Son" thus changing the meaning of the Trinity which all protestants have taken from the RCC. They use the Liturgical form of worship. That is a start as there are other differences as well that mostly extend from these.

 

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post.

 

I can see from just what you posted why this difference would cause such disunity and dysfunction on such fundamental issues. The part where you are talking about original sin for instance. I'm sure you heard the verse that talks about us being conceived in sin as support for original sin. But off the top of my head, I can think of support for your argument as well. Take babies for instance. If a baby dies, most people regardless of their church say that all babies go to heaven. But if God will not let any sin in his presence, and all are born in sin. Then the babies should have a sin nature from conception that should send them to eternal punishment. By your argument about " In other words man is NOT born a sinner, but mortal " The baby was born mortal, but is innocent so would go to heaven.

 

So while your waiting for the other person to respond to you, can you answer me this. With the clear differences between just the orthodox and the protestants, How can unity ever be achieved?

 

Thanks again

Firestormx

Joseph