I want to convert to Christianity and I've been searching all over for what is the truest/best form of Christianity, but I can't find any definitive answer.
I've been leaning towards Orthodoxy but I'm still not sure.
Is Orthodoxy a meme?
What is the truest form of Christianity?
Just give me an answer, I now know that hell is real and demons do exist and I want to avoid that at all costs.
Thank you in advance.
Other urls found in this thread:
sullivan-county.com
oodegr.com
amazon.ca
newadvent.org
rusjournal.org
newadvent.org
myredditvideos.com
twitter.com
Everyone will tell you their own is truest, so you have to read and make your own judgement
You need to be able to answer these questions:
How does the bible teach that you are saved?
Does faith in sacraments constitute a "works salvation"?
That's true, you nee-
TOO SUBTLE
what's the problem
No.
Orthodoxy.
TOO SUBTLE
BEGOME CADOLIC
Can someone give me a quick rundown on Catholicism vs Orthodoxy?
Are autistic american channers, who join an eastern european church because it's "so le traditionale" to gain their long awaited qt pure virgin waifu, a meme?
Yes. The answer is yes
Both can trace their lineage back to the apostles. The main point of contention is whether the church has the authority to change something like the creed. The Catholics say yes, bishops and the Pope can given that they dont commit heresy, orthodox say no they cant.
sullivan-county.com
oodegr.com
These go into some differences from Orthodox perspective.
Why is it so hard to be a good person?
Go to your nearest Catholic church. What's good is there is generally uniformity and they are everywhere.
I did it and a it was a small church, the priest set aside a whole sunday afternoon to talk with me and taught me how to pray. It was a very eye opening experience for me.
Catholicism.
nice Berserk reference btw
what is good?
Catholicism. Go to a Catholic Church and ask to check out RCIA. You don't have to convert at the end if you don't want to (although you should). There isn't a "best form", there is just the one true church that Jesus established. Even in the Apostles and Nicene Creed, we profess to believe in the catholic church. Why is it that only the Catholic Church still keeps that name and everyone else abandoned it? Catholic means universal, and there is literally a Catholic parish in practically every single place on earth, including Antarctica. Even the Eastern Orthodox says that the Bishop of Rome has a special place, but just a "first amongst equals" - um… like what sweetie? So just total nonsense then? You think Jesus just wastes His time?
If you're interested in more arguments regarding the Catholic Church vs Orthodoxy, check out this book: amazon.ca
Also, the main reason why former American Protestants "LARP" and become Eastern Orthodox is because of the deep seated anti Catholicism and hate which is part of Protestant and American culture. It's so hard for them to renounce this and get over it, but they know Protestantism is untenable, so they LARP being an Eastern Orthodox, while maintaining mostly Protestant values, including even insulting Catholics with regards to St. Mary, saying that Protestants and Eastern Orthodox have far more in common than Catholics, calling Catholics crypto-atheists, and so on. It's hilarious and you see it a bunch on this board. Anyways hope this was of some help. God bless you!
No
Orthodoxy
Go to the Church services that you are interested in, pray to the Holy Spirit, and let God do the rest.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved.
That sounds like a works-based salvation to me.
Orthodoxy is an ethnic club. Go Catholic. Ortho countries have insanely high rates of abortion.
Also, the Bishop of Rome has always been the center of unity.
ST. LEO I (Orthodox Feast Day: February 18)
Letter 10
Section 1
newadvent.org
But this mysterious function the Lord wished to be indeed the concern of all the apostles, but in such a way that He has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the Apostles : and from him as from the Head wishes His gifts to flow to all the body: so that any one who dares to secede from Peter's solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery. For He wished him who had been received into partnership in His undivided unity to be named what He Himself was, when He said: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church Matthew 16:18:" that the building of the eternal temple by the wondrous gift of God's grace might rest on Peter's solid rock: strengthening His Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it.
Very true
So true. Had a long journey in the UK trying to get into the Orthodox church. If you were not "one of them" (russian, greek, serbian etc) you were not welcome
sage
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved
Nein.
Christianity isn't a denomination, it's a relationship with Jesus.
Yes. They claim they're apostolic while holding the traditions from the monastic movement and the church government where the bishops have authority above the elders, which even Jerome said was an invention to combat the gnostics and not what the apostles installed for the church. That's why they're so in love with John chrysostom because he strongly preached about these things.
The one I believe in -everyone.
Here a question: are the apostles displaying the truest form of Christianity? If yes, then read what they have to say, rather than relying on us-a derivative of derivatives. Course, the """""""apostolics""""" would object to this for the sake of artificial interpretation, while ignoring the fact that the early church just accepted Origen's allegorical interpretation once it became utilized, when they could've collected an alleged "apostolic" interpretation from other congregations.
Read in context and you'll know more about Christianity than most of these heretics of this board.
source for St. Jerome saying it was an invention to combat the gnostics?
Good choice. I'll just leave this here
Not sure what sort of Orthodoxy you're talking about. All are equal in Orthodoxy, a bishop doesn't necessarily have "authority" above the elders. Authority is about knowledge, not power. Furthermore, bishops aren't even a necessity in Orthodoxy, they've functioned without them in the past.
Protestant detected. You can't just pick up an ancient text and comprehend it like it were written yesterday. There's several problems
1) Humans are not perfect and will make honest errors when reading
2)Some terms don't have the same meaning as they did 2000 years ago.
3) If any person can decide what is true and what is false, then there is no truth, only power
4) Your own vices distort your view of reality and you'll end up projecting your own desires onto the text
I could springboard off of these and show a whole variety of problems.
But you are correct in the notion that OP is better off investigating on his own than coming to Zig Forums for advice.
It doesn't say anything about Gnostics, but newadvent.org
Interestingly, the epistle also shows the novelty of the papacy
That's why we keep reading
And we know what their meaning was
The bible does that, not men
Not if you're devotedly following God
Just read your Bible and pray and let the Holy Spirit guides you.
Don't fall into the religion meme like the pharisees did, where you do traditions that you don't understand and focus on those things/ actions instead of on God. Godspeed friend I hope you gets saved
>Prot "follows what the holy spirit tells them"
Funny how that works. You'd think that people would have asked the Holy Spirit for biblical interpretation years ago would have the same beliefs as those who asked after.
Sooo don't rely on the Holy Spirit then? As far as I know there are wolves in sheep's clothing who led people to false interpretations of the Bible. That's why I told him to read the Bible for himself and pray, and let him decide for himself, let the Holy Sprit guides him
Commentary Titus 1.7
You pulled some footwork to avoid my argument there.
Last time I checked the bible it said this:
What is Philip even doing here? By your standards he should tell the eunuch to read the bible and decide if Christianity or Judaism is the true religion by himself.
So what's your alternative then? Go and ask the priest? If he went to an Orthodox church the priest will give him a different interpretation of salvation and if he went to a Catholic one it will be a different one, and to the Protestant one a different one.
And God through the Holy Spirit helped the enuch by sending Phillip to help him, not the enuch helping himself like I said
The Holy Spirit guides the Church, not men who would make their own church.
Scripture does not interpret itself. There is no such thing as self-evident truth. Both the process of arriving at facts and interpreting facts are determined by the interpretive framework or paradigm that they're run through. When you choose to ignore the witness of the Church, you end up interpreting scripture through the lens of your own worldview, a worldview that is colored by language, culture, history, personal experiences and so on, and with all of the assumptions that a worldview entails. As the Fathers used to say: every heretic quotes scripture in defense of their heresies. This is why I roll my eyes at baptist's tactical copy-pasting of scripture with no explication.
Did you know that there are many bible verses that just say what other bible verses mean?
That is one of the most ridiculous, modernistic, and unbiblical things I've ever seen on this board. Are you an atheist, sir? How can you square such an ultrarationalistic worldview with theistic beliefs? If there is no self-evident truth, then there is no instinct, and no instinctual knowledge, since the ability to ascertain knowledge from text proceeds from man's communicative instinctual abilities. Thus, radical skeptic rationalism must be true, since there is no self-evident truth, no knowledge can be taken for granted, we must work our way up and attain all knowledge.
So the force of your argument is that 1. All interpretation is a pure fabrication in the mind of the interpreter, and therefore, 2. Communication is impossible. For no communication occurs without interpretation, as communication is the sending of signals which are subsequently interpreted so as to transfer meaning from one person to another. But if the interpretation is simply a fabrication of the interpreter, then this transfer of meaning is impossible, since there is no vehicle left for it. This is your argument. You're saying God cannot communicate with us, because communication is impossible, and therefore when God speaks all we hear is ourselves. If you're going to believe this sophistical absurdity, I merely ask that you be consistent in it. For the logical conclusion of this argument is not that the Roman or Greek church is the true church, but an epistemic solipsism. After all, when your bishop speaks, why are his words clearer than God's? Why are you even posting, why are you even reading this? Doesn't the fact you only apply this standard to God's word and absolutely nothing else just scream to you that this argument is nothing more than an excuse to protect your church from the tribunal of scripture? Don't you find it suspicious that your church is so desperate to escape judgement from the bible?
According to you, it is impossible to do anything but twist scripture, so to you following "the witness of the Church" is just deferring to whatever pretzel the guy in the funny hat twists it into. Maybe we should try not twisting scripture, just a thought.
Through proper study these can be easily distinguished from the clear teachings of the bible and a Christian worldview embraced instead.
If they did tend to say that, it was not to deny the authority of the bible, but to deny heretics the right to fill the words of the bible with their own meaning out of context and pretend it is divine teaching.
Of course. I mean I just proved at length the translation of your post is "the bible has no authority" (and that your solution to the alleged problem is an admission of this denial) so it's completely unsurprising you roll your eyes at it.
Found the Protestant.
There are Western Rite Orthodox Churches for this reason
BASED
How can you know if you do not experience them? It's not a work of theory but practice.
Come and see, evaluate the one that gives you the help of Jesus and develop you against your vices. Don't take the word of a random stranger on the internet because you are going to second guess it.
Don't focus on denominations, rather, focus on Jesus Christ.
Read the Bible, and let God guide you.
Psalms 145:18, Matthew 7:7-11
Orthodox