Protestantism vs Orthodoxy

DRIIIVER

Sparrow
Orthodox Inquirer
I’ve also had been in the UK and get the impression that you guys use your churches for concerts and community happenings instead of placed for prayer and liturgy.
They are often places for commerce, selling trinkets and antiques, or hosting such things as beer festivals and art galleries. Absolute debauchery. The Holy Spirit is absent in these places, and much of the UK. Lord have mercy!
 

Trewolla

Sparrow
Read the quote. St. Paisios is advising Orthodox not to tell the heterodox that they are antichrists. He isn't commenting on whether they actually are antichrist. Only God can judge the hearts of men.

Yes, I read the quote. I thought the wording was interesting. St. Paisios didn't say that it was incorrect to refer to non Orthodox Protestants as antichrists. He stated that there was "no need" to do so.

But the question has been answered and I understand.
 

Grow Bag

Pelican
Yes, though in general it's good to avoid getting into debates with the heterodox, unless you have a clear noetic vision that has been cultivated through struggle. Our great interlocutors, such as St. Mark of Ephesus and St. Athanasius, had this experience of theoria, in addition to being learned men.

See the words of St. Theophan the Recluse, which I cited earlier in this thread.
His book, 'Turning the Heart to God', has been absolutely crucial to my repentance process. He speaks to me like no other. It's like the Holy Spirit is working through the book just for me. I've struggled with all sorts of questions regarding my return to Christ and then I open his book, start reading, and he describes my struggle with precision. It happened again last night. Then I came to the realisation that things that I was pondering, in order to further my progress, such as writing a long list of sins, the need for confession, too many to mention really, were all there in this book and that he was ministering to me. When I get christmated I will reverently take his name. I cannot recommend that book enough to catechumens.
 

SimpleMan

Sparrow
The Orthodox position is that it isn't really possible for us to know how God will judge those outside the Orthodox Church.

It doesn't say their salvation is guaranteed, nor does it say that they are condemned just for not being Orthodox.
Thank you.
_______


I've come across the fact/idea that Protestants created their Church(s) separated from the State in the early days. Which I find important.

What is the current relationship between the Orthodox Church and the State/Government?

Are they incorporated, a charity or receive tax exemption in some way - or are they completely independent like the early Protestants?

The fact that some/many are going along with current events would imply they are in some way would it not.
 

Trewolla

Sparrow
It really depends on both the Orthodox person and the non-Orthodox person. I definitely view the kind of Protestant that screeches and rants against the priesthood, the Trinity, Holy Baptism, the Eucharist, other Sacraments, and the Church as being guided by an antichrist spirit. To me the difference is mostly whether the person just “doesn’t know what they don’t know” or consciously attacks Apostolic Christianity.
I've attended quite a few non Orthodox Protestant churches and have never heard any attacks on Apostolic Christianity. In fact, I've never heard it addressed during a service. From my experience, non Orthodox Protestant services are not used to generate confrontational ideas concerning other religious orders. Maybe it happens on occasion. But most mainstream non Orthodox Protestants would likely consider it un-Christian to do so.

,....judgemental, and all that.
 

orthobulgarian

Pigeon
Orthodox
I've come across the fact/idea that Protestants created their Church(s) separated from the State in the early days. Which I find important.
Luther was backed up by the German Prince, Henry VIII was the king of England himself and Calvin was in charge of Geneva. The only Protestant groups that were separated from the state were ones that didn’t succeed taking power in their places. Even the Baptist have their own short lived mini states.
 

Cavalier

Sparrow
Thank you.
_______


I've come across the fact/idea that Protestants created their Church(s) separated from the State in the early days. Which I find important.

What is the current relationship between the Orthodox Church and the State/Government?

Are they incorporated, a charity or receive tax exemption in some way - or are they completely independent like the early Protestants?

The fact that some/many are going along with current events would imply they are in some way would it not.
No. Protestant Churches were State Churches. Prior to the reformation the Roman Catholic Church was not a State Church. It was independent of any European Kingdom. Even after the reformation it was not a State Church. The Protestant Reformation caused a lot of death and destruction in Europe.
 

SimpleMan

Sparrow
@orthobulgarian
@Cavalier

Does the information in this link hold any weight. It's mainly about the State, Royalty, RCC, Protestants, England and the move to America .

Maybe this is for another thread, but quickly, what is the relationship between the Orthodox Church and the Governments in their respective countries? How much influence do they have and are there any legal requirements for them?
 

Cavalier

Sparrow
@orthobulgarian
@Cavalier

Does the information in this link hold any weight. It's mainly about the State, Royalty, RCC, Protestants, England and the move to America .

Maybe this is for another thread, but quickly, what is the relationship between the Orthodox Church and the Governments in their respective countries? How much influence do they have and are there any legal requirements for them?
I would say the link has a Protestant slant. Charles I a despot? Maybe or maybe not he was Catholic so the Protestants might have viewed him that way. Cromwell was a demon however. Killed Catholics. Hated them. Raped Ireland. Loved the Jews though let them back into England. The Church of England after Henry VIII was a State Church. Prior to that there was no State Church. The Roman Catholic Church was Universal throughout Western Europe.
 

DRIIIVER

Sparrow
Orthodox Inquirer
It's NOT that the Council had authority BECAUSE they cited Scripture (any heretical group can convene a council and cite Scripture) but the Church itself has the authority and is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Is this not the status quo of all “non-denominational” Protestant “Bible believing” Christians in the west? Whole denominations have been established around single passages of scriptures (Pentecostal), even single verses (Calvinism and Dispensationalism). Left to our own pride and prelest, we are without fail destined to fall into delusion and separation from the will of God.
Protestants are rejecting the authority of the Church which is clearly attested to in the Scriptures themselves, and when we reject the authority of the Church we are ultimately rejecting the authority of Christ.
Protestants were born out of rebellion to authority, albeit false authority (Roman Catholicism), so is it any wonder that they will not submit to the authority of Christ and His Church? The discontentment in my soul and almost maniacal grasping for a true foundation in Christ I had while transitioning through various heresies is something I never wish to experience again. Thank God for the Church and it’s war against false teachings, protecting the flock from the ravenous wolves.

The Church that Christ established, filled with the Holy Spirit, absolutely destroyed heretical teachings in the first four centuries, and yet Christians today, with only the Bible to fall back on and without the guidance of that same Church, falls for these same heresies 1700+ years later!

Lord have mercy!
 
Last edited:

SimpleMan

Sparrow
Is this not the status quo of all “non-denominational” Protestant “Bible believing” Christians in the west? Whole denominations have been established around single passages of scriptures (Pentecostal), even single verses (Calvinism and Dispensationalism). Left to our own pride and prelest, we are without fail destined to fall into delusion and separation from the will of God.

Protestants were born out of rebellion to authority, albeit false authority (Roman Catholicism), so is it any wonder that they will not submit to the authority of Christ and His Church? The discontentment in my soul and almost maniacal grasping for a true foundation in Christ I had while transitioning through various heresies is something I never wish to experience again. Thank God for the Church and it’s war against false teachings, protecting the flock from the ravenous wolves.

The Church that Christ established, filled with the Holy Spirit, absolutely destroyed heretical teachings in the first four centuries, and yet Christians today, with only the Bible to fall back on and without the guidance of that same Church, falls for these same heresies 1700+ years later!

Lord have mercy!

I do wonder now if this rebellion is not about Christ and His Church, but rather the association of the Church with the State/Gov. I'm aware lots of Protestant groups are also involved with the State/Gov now, but I wonder if this was the case in the early days when this all began with them.

One of their main issues could have been that the Pope and Royalty at the time were getting very rich, while the local Churches on the ground were left struggling. Not very Christ like if mammon became the real priority in the Church, which would justify a rebellion of some kind would it not? They may have then used the Bible as justification for this move and that was the birth of sola scriptura. Ego and pride, never far from each one us, came into it, leading some of the 'leaders' of this movement to do strange and evil things and made people to doubt the value of Tradition.
 

Pantheon

Robin
Orthodox
Protestantantism is revolutionary, based on transferring religion from the body of the church to legalistic frameworks of free market individualism.

Belief and justification in the Protestant faith is like an individual agreement between you and God ("sign the contract here").

In Orthodoxy Christ is at the center, while individuals are at the periphery and can be envisaged as bowing down to Him around a circle. The risen Christ is central, not the man on the cross. He is the King so he will not offer you any business proposal, but you can choose to submit to him or not and receive benefits/loss of grace thereafter. The Kingdom of God is not a free market.

Protestants do not even prostrate before God, for Christ's sake!
 

Cavalier

Sparrow
I do wonder now if this rebellion is not about Christ and His Church, but rather the association of the Church with the State/Gov. I'm aware lots of Protestant groups are also involved with the State/Gov now, but I wonder if this was the case in the early days when this all began with them.

One of their main issues could have been that the Pope and Royalty at the time were getting very rich, while the local Churches on the ground were left struggling. Not very Christ like if mammon became the real priority in the Church, which would justify a rebellion of some kind would it not? They may have then used the Bible as justification for this move and that was the birth of sola scriptura. Ego and pride, never far from each one us, came into it, leading some of the 'leaders' of this movement to do strange and evil things and made people to doubt the value of Tradition.
It is also possible that to enrich themselves and no longer pay fealty to their sovereign lord, various barons embraced Protestantism. Henry VIII just wanted to keep on divorcing his wives and the pope wouldn’t let him. Just as an idea. How do we know that in fact the Catholic KIngs were so despotic as claimed? After all now we see propaganda against men, whites, any form of Christianity, normal sexual relations and expressions. In a future where these ideas have been victorious wouldn’t it just all be assumed to have been true?
 

GodfatherPartTwo

Kingfisher
I do wonder now if this rebellion is not about Christ and His Church, but rather the association of the Church with the State/Gov. I'm aware lots of Protestant groups are also involved with the State/Gov now, but I wonder if this was the case in the early days when this all began with them.
What they're saying when they say Protestants are rebelling against the authority of Christ and His Church is that Protestants are not accepting the beliefs of their denomination, Eastern Orthodoxy.

The relationship between the State and the Church is a separate discussion but a good one to get into.
 

SimpleMan

Sparrow
Belief and justification in the Protestant faith is like an individual agreement between you and God ("sign the contract here").
I thought this was the case for all who follow Him. Testament and Covenant means 'contract' does it not?

In Orthodoxy Christ is at the center, while individuals are at the periphery and can be envisaged as bowing down to Him around a circle. The risen Christ is central, not the man on the cross. He is the King so he will not offer you any business proposal, but you can choose to submit to him or not and receive benefits/loss of grace thereafter. The Kingdom of God is not a free market.

The place I'm at is that Jesus is the Priest of the Church
Jesus is also the King of this Kingdom on Earth and of Heaven.
I serve Him above any man.
 

SimpleMan

Sparrow
The relationship between the State and the Church is a separate discussion but a good one to get into.
I looked throughout the forum and I guess it hasn't been dicussed yet.

It is also possible that to enrich themselves and no longer pay fealty to their sovereign lord, various barons embraced Protestantism. Henry VIII just wanted to keep on divorcing his wives and the pope wouldn’t let him. Just as an idea. How do we know that in fact the Catholic KIngs were so despotic as claimed? After all now we see propaganda against men, whites, any form of Christianity, normal sexual relations and expressions. In a future where these ideas have been victorious wouldn’t it just all be assumed to have been true?

I can see error happening due to any man or women, we are idiots/sinful. Progaganda has been aroung a long time, and will continue, I just finished watching a documentary about Constantine which was very eye openning - if true.

God dosen't change, and His Laws/Rules don't change, that is what I hang onto.
 

Trewolla

Sparrow
When I joined this forum I knew very little about Orthodox Christianity. From what I've learned, I don't believe that it's a bad path and I don't believe that it's an incorrect path. But I don't believe that it's the only path to establishing a relationship with God.

My opinion, regardless of the religious order that one chooses, the path to recognition by God as one of his own is much the same. Love of God and love towards your fellow man is a basic requirement and I believe that every man has to work that out within himself-- even within a religious order. Love for God isn't difficult if you can develop a proper understanding of his nature. Love for your fellow man can be a bit more difficult--especially in these trying times.

For me, the big step has been learning how to be in the world but not of the world. I feel as if I've accomplished that to a certain degree. But I still have work to do.

It's all a process, and the process is the recognition of the need for becoming a spiritual person then becoming a decent example of one before ones life has ended.

I've got a lot of work to do and not as much time to do it as many of you on here.

I wish that I had started earlier.
 

Hermetic Seal

Pelican
Orthodox
Gold Member
Carrying over the conversation from the "Orthodoxy And The Religion Of The Future" thread...

...your misunderstanding about how we are saved through grace and not through the associated actions springing from grace.

This is begging the question by assuming that by "grace" one means essential what the Reformers took it to mean: "mental assent to believing in Jesus in abstract and disconnected from any tangible connection from your body/the physical world." This is the faith of demons and contradicted by Scripture itself, such as:

Matthew 7.21 - Only those who do the will of the Father will enter the kingdom ofHeaven.
Matthew 10.22 - He who endures to the end will be saved.
Matthew 16.27 - For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.
Matthew 19.16-17 - What must I do to have eternal life? Keep commandments and follow me.

To name just a couple examples from St. Matthew's Gospel, which sound far more like Orthodoxy than protestantism. Christ himself does not recognize any conception of faith divorced from how one acts. Yet the faith-as-mental-assent is the predominant conception of faith amongst most evangelicals. In contrast, Orthodoxy understands grace as present in the sacraments, a physical means of experiencing God. The protestant paradigm is inadvertently pseudo-gnostic in that it places the realm of the mind and mental asset as supremely important and disconnected from the physical, but as we are both physical and spiritual creatures, God imparts grace to us at least in part through physical means. There is more to faith than mere mental assent or an emotional feeling, and to say otherwise is to engage in reductionism alien to the first 1500 years of Christian thought.

As far as the conversations I've had and reading I've done I have yet to hear anything suggesting Orthodox understand faith as it was historically understood.

Then you have a whole lot more reading (and especially talking to Orthodoxy clergy or monastics) to do. If one reads St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, etc. their teachings are entirely harmonious and consistent with Orthodoxy, and utterly dissimilar to protestantism. It is impossible to read St. John Chrysostom's homilies on Jesus' parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, for example, and find anything of remote resemblance to Sola Fide.

Definitely curious to understand how "we are saved" in "we are saved, we are being saved, we will be saved" doesn't actually mean "we are saved." I have yet to have anyone Orthodox explain this in any reasonable way.

Those verses from Matthew I quoted above are fully consistent with this idea, along with many others (especially in Hebrews, 1 John). We "are saved" in the sense of having been joined to the Church and our former sins vaporized in Baptism. If you were to be tragically hit by a meteor after walking out of Church on the day of your baptism, it could be comfortably assumed that you will be in Heaven because you haven't yet committed any new sins. We "are being saved" in that we are being healed from the effects of sin, an ongoing process, as we pursue Christ. We "will be saved" if we continue and repent from our ongoing sins and live a life of following Christ. Of course, at any time somebody can apostatize or quit practicing their faith, placing themselves in jeopardy entirely through their own rejection of God. None of this is terribly complicated, but this is some degree of mystery inherent to all this that runs contrary to the expectations of rationalism. Many western Christians are usually trapped in the box of scholastic rationalism and salvation is by no means something easily reducible to such convenient systematic categorization.

It's not at the top of my mind but I'd also love to hear again how and why the words of the Church founders are so heavily discounted in Orthodox.

Who are the "Church founders"? The Apostles? Christ is the founder of the Church, and in my experience Orthodoxy places far more value on Christ's actual teachings than Protestantism, which avoids the many uncomfortable teachings that clash with Sola Fide in favor of the more comfortable territory of St. Paul's epistles The Scriptures are the bedrock of all Patristic thought. Acting like the Orthodox just ignore parts of Scripture they don't like only reflects your ignorance of what we actually believe. It is far more of a stretch to argue that everybody everywhere read Scripture incorrectly for almost 1500 years until some disgruntled ex-Catholic lawyers showed up with their definitive exposition.
 

GodfatherPartTwo

Kingfisher
Matthew 7:21 ESV
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

John 6:40 ESV
For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”

Nothing about earning Salvation with good works.

We can take this to a different thread but nothing you said runs contrary to Protestantism, outside of your misunderstanding about how we are saved through grace and not through the associated actions springing from grace. Cart and horse, and all that.

Theosis is confusing the cart for the horse altogether.
 
Top