General Christian Discussions

Christian Traditions are Heresy – samw3

samw3

Member

Posts: 542
From: Toccoa, GA, USA
Registered: 08-15-2006
An ode to warsong.

Christian Traditions are heresy.. at least as they are interpreted by the orthodox, and catholic churches. Our long-winded brother warsong has previously quoted 2 Thessalonians 2:15 as a proof text and scriptural back up for the orthodox belief in Christian Traditions.

Here is the verse:

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye
have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

The orthodox religion is interpreting the use of "traditions" in this verse to justify acceptance of the church's traditions as having equal authority with the written words of Scripture. But we have to take this verse in the context in which Paul is writing. Here is a analysis of the passage in context.

Paul had been at Thessalonica previously, with opportunity to proclaim the Gospel and give instruction to believers. Now he is writing to believers at Thessalonica who have previously been instructed by his spoken "word," in order to give them further instruction by his written "word."

What was the spoken "word" he had previously given? In 1 Thes. 1:5 he identifies it as the gospel, the good news about Jesus, mentioning that it came not only in "word" but also in power.

In the next verse he reminds them that they had received the "word" with joy, though they were in much tribulation. A few verses later the "word" is called "the word of the Lord" (v. 8), which after they had received it, they sent out all over the place. In 2:1 he further says that he spoke to them "the Gospel of God," affirming in v. 4 that he spoke to them as one entrusted by God with the Gospel. In v. 8 he says that he imparted to them the Gospel of God, and in v. 9 that he proclaimed the Gospel of God. In v. 13 he declares that when they "received from us the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God."

The "word" they had received from him, then, was the good news of salvation, not any message of his own. The content of the "word" is further explicated in 4:1-8. In this section Paul speaks of the instruction he gave "as to how you ought to walk and please God" (v. 1). In the next verse he makes clear that these instructions (or commands, or precepts) were not from himself, but that he was simply passing down what had come from the Lord Jesus. Jesus' teaching included not only salvation but also sanctification, and they were to accept that teaching as authoritative.

Even as he writes to them in the first letter, he reiterates that what he is saying to them in writing is "the word of the Lord" (4:15). Now in the second letter he writes, he is concerned about some false teaching that is circulating in the church. He warns them not to be shaken by "a word or a letter as if from us" (2 Thes. 2:2). He was well aware that misleading "words" or teaching could easily lead the believers astray. Therefore, he strongly urges them to hold to the "traditions" (or instruction or teaching) they had previously received from him, either by spoken "word" when he was with them or by the letters he was writing.

It is very clear that he is speaking of the "tradition" he has personally delivered to them in 3:6, when he warns them to stay aloof from a brother who does not live "according to the tradition which you received from us." It thus seems clear that Paul is not referring to some source of authoritative teaching that is to be accepted alongside of the Scripture.

The "tradition" or teaching he refers to is the message of salvation and sanctification that originated with Christ, and that he was simply passing along to the church both verbally and in writing. The content of that message is not something in addition to Scripture, but is referred to in Scripture, as Paul himself urges the readers to recall what he spoke in "word" when with them personally and now reiterates the same truths in writing through his letters.

Further study will note that the passages I have referred to use the same term for "word," (logos) and the same term for "tradition" (paradosis). One might also consider Col. 2:8, where Paul clearly differentiates teaching that comes "according to the tradition of men" rather than "according to Christ."

And what is the tradition or teaching according to Christ? Believers are not to move away "from the hope of the gospel that you have heard" (Col. 1:23) but they are to "walk in Christ ... just as you were instructed" (2:7).

Thus we can see that tradition is not something added to the message of salvation and sanctification; it is simply that very same message, the message amply set forth in the Scriptures. Believers are to beware that "no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ" (2:8), and thus believers should beware the philosophies and empty deception of the orthodox and catholic churches.

God bless you all as you seek Him more.

------------------
Sam Washburn

[This message has been edited by samw3 (edited January 31, 2007).]




Posts:
From:
Registered:
wow you do have things backwards. lol
Since you are against verbal words then here is some verbal words for you about the topic which I found a while ago. lol
http://www.pigizois.net/omilies_eng/F08A-Tradition.mp3
You can put speed up if you like if its slow for you.
More quotes from the bible about traditions explained. even saint Paul specifically said to hold traditions that they deliver to you. I'll let the guy explain to you.

Christ knew that fake Christians would come and the early church took them down. What you want is to let the church allow heresy, which you admit that many protestant sects have done many bad things since its loose. Don't reinvent what Christ established. I already stumped you but I guess you like that.

Enjoy

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"
My original game for GP32

kenman

Member

Posts: 518
From: Janesville WI
Registered: 08-31-2006
Sam, when I saw you posted I wondered how long it would take for warsong to reply. 1 hour and 8 minutes!
ArchAngel

Member

Posts: 3450
From: SV, CA, USA
Registered: 01-29-2002
you know, warsong, if you hang upside long enough, everything that is upsidedown will look rightside up and vice versa.

------------------
Realm Master: "I'm cockasian"
Soterion Studios

steveth45

Member

Posts: 536
From: Eugene, OR, USA
Registered: 08-10-2005
Don't throw rocks at the bee hive! When you do that, we all end up getting stung.

------------------
+---------+
|steveth45|
+---------+

Lazarus

Member

Posts: 1668
From: USA
Registered: 06-06-2006
...I think I'll go take several large aspirin and lie down...
spade89

Member

Posts: 561
From: houston,tx
Registered: 11-28-2006
ahhh.... arguing for the sake of arguing, right warsong.

------------------
Matthew(22:36-40)"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Whose Son Is the Christ

InsanePoet

Member

Posts: 638
From: Vermont, USA
Registered: 03-12-2003
Upon examination of the full context of the verse it would seem that the verse isn't talking about "traditions" at all but rather the teachings of Christ.

2 Thessalonians 2:13-15 NASB
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. It was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

At the time the Thessalonians believed that Christ has already returned and that they "missed" the rapture. That is why this chapter talks about the "man of lawlessness" because Paul is explaining to them that Christ has not returned and he is encouraging them not to be shaken by what others say.

2 Thessalonians 2:2-4 NASB

that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God,displaying himself as being God.

It seems pretty clear to me that this is what this passage is talking about and *NOT* about the particular practices of Catholic or Protestant churches.

So, how does this verse apply to us today?

Although we may not think we "missed" the rapture like the Thessalonians did, the principle remains the same which is to not let any heresy shake us.

Really does it matter what particular traditions a church performs? the "church" structure is really an imperfect vessel, and it's imperfect because we are imperfect.

What matters is the preservation of the Gospel message and the contents of the heart.

Galatians 5:14 NASB

For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."


I don't know if I repeated anyone, those are just my thoughts.

------------------
"I find myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world!"
-C. S. Lewis




Posts:
From:
Registered:
I hope some enjoyed the audio.
I was thinking of posting this topic but wasn't in the mood to, but since someone brought it up then ok here is are few points about it, also so some typos and bound to show up. Lol But with a title like this he seems to be 100% confident as if he is perfect, but a slew of mistakes on top of others it seems..

I figure some would be too lazy to read so I gave the audio which game some good points and other verses but people still say strange things. Many sites bring many good points which many do not consider or know.

To only go with what the bible says would reject the unrecorded good deeds of Christ that have not been put in, Christ words, the apostles, and the churches which have helped preserve and given us the teachings.
"John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen." But many denounce the oral traditions which preserve the rest of Christ wonders and his wonders are denounced. There are many reasons why secularists want people to reply only on the bible to divide and conquer them. this method world better than making fake churches since let the faithful person have so much pride that they know better and since they are human will let all the errors come in. Destruction form within than is more dangerous than from outside. It is obvious that no wonder secularists have so much power in protestant nations and they get so much money and benefits form them while they also attack Christians. The future looks bright for secularists thanks to Christians that take the bible into their own hands since many do not and can not understand it. Holy tradition/church tradition validated and canonized the bible as you know it made by word of mouth which many reject the church experience of word of mouth. The early church before protestants and Catholics knew heretics would come and put it down before they came.

"16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I
will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
it.""According to this interpretation, a complete disruption or end of such apostolic succession would mean that these promises were not kept as would an apostolic succession which, while formally intact, completely abandoned the teachings of the Apostles and their immediate successors; as, for example, if all the bishops of the world agreed to abrogate the Nicene Creed or to repudiate the Bible."

Am I wrong? Well how can I be in your definition since you give me the authority to interpret the bible any way I want and I will just like every other Christian. So if I am wrong then so is everyone else. the difference is that I know am can be and will be wrong no mater what. Christ knows this which is why the apostles, priests, and church and a whole and not an individual had and has the authority over common people, especially when there was no bible before. The church grows and so does its experience and understanding of the scriptures.

ďPHILIPPIANS 4:9 Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.Ē Do you do what he does? He also fasted but many will ignore that in what he did since people want complete freedom with no bounds which leads many so over do it and fall face first. Is fasting bad? Should people keep on indulging with no restrictions? Some people want it that there are no rules or holy traditions to follow, and you are free to do as you please in what you see fit and right in what you interpret. People can not restrain themselves form over eating, smoking, drinking, and every other indulgence or sin but think they can retrain themselves when it comes to the bible. Once you compromise you keep compromising. Some have name calling like legalism to have holy traditions like the early church, but modern cultural plays with words to separate people with God to be loose.

ď2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;Ē

http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Bible.show/sVerseID/29685/eVerseID/29685
"The "disorderly walking" was that they were not working. They were waiting it out until Christ returned. Paul called that a deviation from the traditions."
"God has His traditions, and the major difference between divine and human traditions is that His are right and trueóand they work!"

As I said taking the bible just like the law into your own hand only brings more problems which are why it is a sin to only reply on the bible without the church that Christ came to build.
"1:11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea."
Is anyone connected with those churches religious views? Obviously not. Christ is the beginning and the end. Christ said it in the same verse commenting about the churches since they are the first and the last in what they teach.
"2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death."
"3:22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches." It says the word church over 110 times maybe it needs to say it 1000 times, but I guess many will reject it and the priest (mentioned over 160 times) which even the apostles were head of my church but that doesnít count since they would rather take it from someone interpretation of a translation of the books the church, priest, and apostles helped make, over 1500-2000 years ago which the meanings have changed in some ways. Even the example of the word slave, leisure time meant the opposite of todayís terms, so modern day references are not always reliable than what the churches experience is to help clarify things, thanks to its tradition try to clarify which people don't listen. Again not my problem what people think but as the other post stated the fruits of a sect shows a lot than just words that are mistranslated, misunderstood, and people sin by thinking they are perfect to interpret the bible well without any help form the church.


One point made is that people are not perfect which is why sects have people that make it and they are not perfect. The foundation is not perfect and they think imperfection can lead you to perfection?
"6:39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?"
Are people saying that the eastern Orthodox church come from the same imperfect foundation? As bad as some assume and make up about it, Many people that know the church know it has done far more good, and far less damage than other sects, but everyone always thinks they are the right path.
"Matthew 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."
But it's not my job explain everything. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"


"18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven."

In the end if you really do care you will look for the answers than no nothing and assume you know it all. I am not responsible for anyone, but I should at least point the way, and you take full responsibility for not hearing a warning and only trying to attack it.

I say... A car is going to hit you watch out. You say...donít be negative God tells me what to do. Car hit you. Next thing you know you speak to God and God asks... why didnít you move? Because you didn't tell me to. God says...

"JAMES 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?...
2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only...
2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."

:O "have we not prophesied in thy name?"


"Matthew 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

There is a lot to about it, but I do not take complete authority tom know it all which you know where to go as I stated. If I pay attention to your views for safe measure then I follow myself, and then I come back to my side tell you its your turn to see my view and if you don't that is not proper to want to know. If that is the extent of truth then it showed the limitations just like the limitations of dedication (metaphor).Well I guess it measures peopleís faith in how much they want to know about God. too bad some have a lot of faith but do the wrong things.

The church grows but does not contradict, it helps add virtue and not only tell you to avoid sin. Remember
ďPeter 1:5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
1:6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
1:7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
1:8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.Ē

good luck

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"

[This message has been edited by warsong (edited February 01, 2007).]

InsanePoet

Member

Posts: 638
From: Vermont, USA
Registered: 03-12-2003
So from what the guy said, it sounds like he is arguing that these "traditions" are necessary to be held. Am I correct?

And you are saying that these traditions were taught by the apostiles and Christ but just not recorded in the Bible?

------------------
"I find myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world!"
-C. S. Lewis




Posts:
From:
Registered:
We have the freedom to do what we want but to better our selves we have to condition ourselves to do what is right and proper. HOLY Traditions will help not hurt, and the bible does state about it but if for more explanation read on.

Sam raises a good point in his main argument which he ignores if some pay close attention. To not listen to others but to listen to him, and got authority form Christ, and they give authority to their successors, and that no one above the other but equal. Apostolic succession has that which many listen to others which the Apostle warns about listening to outside sources. Ignoring Apostolic tradition doesn't help you and you see many devoted Christians that ignore it pay the price sooner or later.

ďThe New Testamental or Christian Tradition is also called the apostolic tradition and the tradition of the Church.Ē ďHoly Tradition is, therefore, that which is passed on and given over within the Church from the time of Christ's apostles right down to the present day. ď

ďTradition is a gift of the Holy Spirit, a living experience, which is relived and renewed through time. It is the true faith, which is revealed by the Holy Spirit to the true people of God.
Tradition, therefore, cannot be reduced to a mere enumeration of quotations from the Scriptures or from the Fathers. It is the fruit of the incarnation of the Word of God, His crucifixion and resurrection as well as His ascension, all of which took place in space and time. Tradition is an extension of the life of Christ into the life of the Church. ď

The bible doesn't say a lot of things which many Christians do. It doesn't say which way to make the cross which the non orthodox sects seem to do it backwards, it doesn't say which had to have the wedding ring which its on the other hand for non orthodox, the the orthodox people do not put their hands together while praying while non orthodox do, a lot of things that the non orthodox people do were done before other sects come about and divided the church to put their own cultural wants and desires in their. They don't want to fast so they take it out, they don't want to listen and act like they know it all so they do ti themselves it themselves, and the list goes on.

As one site says
ďif we compare Orthodox spirituality with other Christian traditions, the difference in approach and method of therapy is more evident. ď
ďHaving given a framework to the topic at hand, if Orthodox spirituality is examined in relationship to Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, the differences are immediately discovered.
Protestants do not have a "therapeutic treatment" tradition. They suppose that believing in God, intellectually, constitutes salvation. Yet salvation is not a matter of intellectual acceptance of truth; rather it is a person's transformation and divinisation by grace. This transformation is effected by the analogous "treatment" of one's personality, as shall be seen in the following chapters. In the Holy Scripture it appears that faith comes by hearing the Word and by experiencing "theoria" (the vision of God). We accept faith at first by hearing in order to be healed, and then we attain to faith by theoria, which saves man. Protestants, because they believe that the acceptance of the truths of faith, the theoretical acceptance of God's Revelation, i.e. faith by hearing saves man, do not have a "therapeutic tradition." It could be said that such a conception of salvation is very naive.

The Roman Catholics as well do not have the perfection of the therapeutic tradition which the Orthodox Church has. Their doctrine of the Filioque is a manifestation of the weakness in their theology to grasp the relationship existing between the person and society. ď
from ďThe Difference Between Orthodox Spirituality and Other TraditionsĒ
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/hierotheos_difference.aspx The site gives a lot more explanations.

Both take away spirituality in many ways which many. Even real miracles that can not be disputes are ignores and some follow coincidences to see the Virgin Marry on toast. Many want to believe but they are deprived and look at any silly thing as a miracle than real miracles. Even the notion of blessing water, holy fire, and the other Orthodox miracle are not known to many and they substitute them for naive things since thats the extend of the sect. Christ is no trickster magician which many sects dumb down their religion to be. The sad thing is that many think they know it all despite not knowing the Original Christian religion that Christ established which many assume and guess what the Orthodox church is. There is a reason why it is called the best kept secret in American since it would be bad for secularists and protestant their allies which are their main supporters.

I will try to post soon about fasting traditions. I would guess it is not necessary but it does help in many ways besides just eating since it conditions the person. Even the apostles fasted and they even said for others to follow their lead in what they do.

Another Orthodox site says
ďThus truth in its fullness does not exist outside the Church, for there is neither Scripture, nor Tradition. This is why St. Paul admonishes the Galatians that even if an angel from heaven preaches another gospel to them, he must be condemned:
"If any man preach any other gospel to you than that you have received (parelavete) let him be condemned" (1:8-9).
And he writes to his disciple Timothy to follow strictly the "precepts of our faith" and the "sound instructions" he received from him and avoid "godless myths" (1 Tim. 4: 4-7). He also admonishes the Colossians to avoid "merely human injunctions and teachings" (2: 22), and to follow Christ:... (Col. 2: 6-8). ď http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7116.asp
Other quotes on the post from http://www.oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=2
Also why some people confuse holy tradition that regular traditions like closing the church doors for example. :P
http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=94&SID=3

As ignorant as I am compared to experienced and knowledgeable priests, many here show they know far less every time they assume to think that they know more.
ďA fundamental teaching of the Holy Fathers is that the Church is a "Hospital" which cures the wounded man. In many passages of Holy Scripture such language is used. ď Not my fault that too many sick Christians ignore the spiritual hospital.

Good luck

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 16:18 I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." "7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"
:pI may be outnumbered but not out gunned.

HanClinto

Administrator

Posts: 1828
From: Indiana
Registered: 10-11-2004
quote:
Originally posted by insanepoet:
And you are saying that these traditions were taught by the apostiles and Christ but just not recorded in the Bible?

That's also what I read Warsong as saying originally, and I can't find where he addressed that in his latest post.

Warsong, if you haven't already answered them, I would also appreciate a (preferably succinct) answer to InsanePoet's questions.

--clint




Posts:
From:
Registered:
Han
You want me to rely so soon? Lol Awww come on well I think it's too soon to write another page or two. I hold back a lot for a few reasons, also that I say too much. lol But I already answered that in the other post which I was going to quote after Insane poet replied but since you asked for it sooner.

ďAccording to Philo, the authors of the Bible were in a condition of "possession" by the Spirit of God, who was just using these authors as blind instruments. A better view is the so-called "dynamic view" of the cooperation between man and the Holy Spirit in the case of the Bible. In any case of "synergy" (cooperation) between God and man, God leads, and man follows; God works, and man accepts God's work in him, as God's coworker in subordination to Him. So it is with divine inspiration in the case of the Bible: the Holy Spirit inspires, and the sacred author follows the Holy Spirit's injunctions, utilizing his own human and imperfect ways to express the perfect message and doctrine of the Holy Spirit.
In this sense, we can understand possible imperfections in the books of the Bible, since they are the result of the cooperation between the all-perfect and perfecting Divine Author, the Spirit, and the imperfect human author. Biblical textual criticism is completely normal and acceptable by the Orthodox, since they see the Bible in this light. Nothing human is perfect, including the Bible, which is the end product of human cooperation with the divine Spirit.Ē

Also one priest says ďGod alone is perfect. His words, however, are true. Hence, the words of Scripture reveal His truth, and reveal the Living Word of God, Jesus Christ. His words were recorded by humans, who are less than perfect. But this does not diminish God's perfection, nor does it diminish the truthfulness of His written word.ď
Does that better clarify? I meant the same thing but that its not direct as many people want it just like how the bible is not. Even the example of which same tried to point out that the apostles doesn't want people to listen to outside sources.

Ok I better stop before I go on another page. But look over what was said since things gob together than apart despite it not looking that way at first glance. Which is why I said take a look at the material for a better explanation since things are not black and white. I am no priest and it's not my job to explain everything or state the official stance of the church or bible. Many things explain it which many look past and they should try to understand it better. This is why taking it into your own hands will not work always and it doesn't.

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 16:18 I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." "7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"
:pI may be outnumbered but not out gunned.

samw3

Member

Posts: 542
From: Toccoa, GA, USA
Registered: 08-15-2006
This thread's initial post tries to detail one of the missing pillars of the "sola verbum Dei" (by the Word of God alone) argument. "Sola verbum Dei" encompasses both the idea of the authoritativeness of scripture as well as giving doctrinal authority to the supposed "apostolic leaders" of the church.

I personally, because of the fallibility of men and lack of reasonable scriptural support(prima scriptura), reject "sola verbum Dei" in favor of "sola scriptura"

"Sola scriptura" is the assertion that the Bible as God's written word is self-authenticating, clear to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the only source of Christian doctrine.

The other pillar that warsong and the orthodox faith is trying to stand on is the tradition of Apostolic Succession. Unfortunately it is simply missing from scripture. To make up for this the orthodox church makes vague allusions to it citing references to Matthew 16:18 and 18:18, claiming that Jesus started a succession with Peter as the "rock" of the church and the "holder of the keys".

Even the orthodox agree with protestants that the context clearly shows that the "rock" refers to the faith pronounced by Peter in the previous verse. But then they immediate make the absurd statement that this somehow ties to a succession of apostles that continues to this day; without ANY scriptural references.

I will try to comment more on the "holder of the keys" verse and the flawed idea of the spiritual division between the clergy and laity as I have time.

To God be the glory.

------------------
Sam Washburn

[This message has been edited by samw3 (edited February 06, 2007).]

Simon_Templar

Member

Posts: 330
From: Eau Claire, WI USA
Registered: 10-25-2004
hey everyone

The argument with the Orthodox and Catholics in regard to Holy Tradition is that the church has maintained the teachings of the apostles which were not recorded in scripture, but rather delivered oraly to the churches.

For example, as the OP points out, Paul in the verse cited was referring to the things he had already told the Corinthian church when he was there in person. He taught them a great deal, as he did with all the other churches. If you look at all the epistles of Paul, several times he makes refrence to the things he taught the churches when he was there in person.

In many cases the epistles that we have in scripture were written to correct errors that had crept in where the apostles had already taught in person. Thus much of the "day to day" issues of how a church service should be run, the details of how we should worship etc, are not contained in the epistles, because all this was taught to the churches in person when the church was first established.
Over the years the churches passed down those things which had been taught to them in person as Holy Tradition.


Orthodox and Catholics usually present this as though the traditions have never changed etc etc. However, the fact of the matter is that the traditions have been added to and expanded over time. In the Catholic church they argue that the church has the authority to do this (they call it Magisterium).
Catholics would say that the additions and expansions the church has made have not really changed tradition, but rather just refined it, made it more specific as needed.

For example, the historical record shows that infant baptism, and adult baptism were both practiced in the early church until the 5th century when the Church ruled that infant baptism was the correct practice. From the cahtolic perspective, this was not a change. They would argue that infant baptism was always the correct and traditional practice, but that it didn't need to be defined dogmaticly until the practice of not baptizing infants became wide spread. Then The church needed to make a decision.

But then the question comes up.. why isn't Holy Tradition part of scripture.. the Orthodox and Catholics usually say that Holy Tradition was passed down orally and Scripture was written.. but all of the Holy Tradition was written down at some point or other. Much of the Holy Tradition had been written by the time the church formalized the canon of scripture.. so why didn't they include the written sources from which the Holy Tradition is drawn?

That being said, there is much to be learned from going back to the early writings of the church. You can find a good deal of teaching which is very valuable and passed down from the apostles. Writings like the Didache, St. Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Polycarp, Clement, and so on. If you want to know what Christian teaching and practice really was originally, go to those sources.

------------------
-- All that is gold does not glitter,
Deep roots are not touched by the frost,
The old that is strong does not wither,
Not all those who wander are lost.

spade89

Member

Posts: 561
From: houston,tx
Registered: 11-28-2006
just to add something to samw3's argument, remember when Philip explained the ethiopian eunuch about the Bible and Philip just left him there(he was taken by an angel or something), and all he had to start a religion was the Bible.

------------------
Matthew(22:36-40)"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Whose Son Is the Christ




Posts:
From:
Registered:
It's interesting to see people scramble and throw any weak argument and ignore the many points stated while ignoring history and telling people to look at history. Yes I always tell people to look at history from all side. Also misunderstandings and about the early church/orthodox church will not help your point. Be a child as Christ said, so try to listen since many seem to act like they know it all and misunderstand and assume which is sad.

It is odd that no one take a logical stance and fair stance but a one sides one. Make a chart of pros and cons about the sects and traditions and maybe some might understand why things are as they are. Do you honestly think that the apostles want people to fend for themselves without help? Christ knew that fakers will come and his apostles listen to only him, the apostles knew that other fakes come and the people they taught had to listen to the apostles words only, the apostles students knew that fakers are all around and they told their students to listen to them only, etc etc. What point of logic don't you get? Can I say I am your dad? Can I say I am your president? So why listen to an outside source that the OFFICIAL source that has a line of command? People fear it seems and will lie (sin) to believe that they are right since they feel comfortable where they are.

Having one foot to stand on is not the way, to eat only bread is not the way since you can not live off bread alone. You need everything. As St. Paul said to do what he does and not to listen to outside sources, but that is what other sects are outside sources coming under Christ's name. As bas as some people might assume of the original church that is how the church is which many will not accept which is why many make their own Christian sect every year and say anyone can be saved under their sect which is false.

The protestant perspective as the article said which I bet many didn't read but want to say "OPINIONS", ignore in its explanations describes how "such a conception of salvation is very naive." Christianity is not a religion of opinion. Christianity has been diluted enough and the worse enemies to it are Christians sorry to say.

As for the catholic church they are excommunicated since they are not good and nothing good can come out of something bad, but many believe that it can which the protestant sects spewed out if a rotten apple. Do you know whats in a rotten apple? As Christ said burn the tree the doesn't bear good fruit, it didn't get burned and it just made more rotten apples.


Simon on aside note
I was wondering when you would show up. I shot down your past assertions and you then are no where to be found to reply. As I said it is good you try to make yourself learned but you are getting ahead of yourself. I hope you don't go with the gnostic Christian views which have been taken down quickly. You still have a lot to learn, and remember even Socrates that was considered to be one of the smartest men was humble enough to admit that the only thing he was sure of was that he knew nothing. Even the bible wars about watching out for the learned people since they distort thing. You should know where that part is since present that you know it so well.

anyway
This is like a verbal chess game. I can see my opponents pieces but they don't know mine well and they miss me and cheer that they moves. In the end I have not seem many that want to learn, but say that they love God and will do what they want than what God wants. What do I care more protestants are conventing to orthodoxy anyway that really want to learn so it' a major blow for them anyway. It's not my job to convert, I mostly talk about political issues which I point out the product of Christian sects fruits, which is not towards Christian ideology. the problem with a bland man is that he doesn't see the odds against him. Nit pick all you want, in the end you take responsibility for your actions.

I posted too much and by doing so it over whelms others to remember it and it seems to go in one ear and out the other. But if you want ti short your wrong in distorting and taking religion into your own hand only brings problems and you can see the rotten fruits of the labor all over the world. Read the link and what I said again to understand it sine many thing that were said ignore some points. I will have a new post sooner or later of an example about this soon enough.

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 16:18 I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." "7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"
:pI may be outnumbered but not out gunned.

samw3

Member

Posts: 542
From: Toccoa, GA, USA
Registered: 08-15-2006
quote:
It's interesting to see people scramble and throw any weak argument and ignore the many points stated while ignoring history and telling people to look at history.
No one is scrambling except you and you have yet to show that my argument is weak. C'mon! Show me where the flaw is? And as for your "historical" information, you have not yet proved it to be credible. Any good debater should be able to show the credibility of their sources.

quote:
Do you honestly think that the apostles want people to fend for themselves without help?
I'm saying that this is precisely what the Holy Spirit does. He is called the "Counselor".

quote:
It is odd that no one take a logical stance and fair stance but a one sides one.
Again I say, you have not show your side credible. You can't just say "Because the priest said so", or "Because of such-n-such tradition" That is circular reasoning and a very bad debating practice.

quote:
As St. Paul said to do what he does and not to listen to outside sources
And I am saying that YOU are deceived and we should not listen to YOU. Again, show me that your sources are CREDIBLE! Show me that "Christian Tradition" as interpreted by your sect is "God Inspired Doctrine". Show me that "Apostolic Succession" is in the Bible. You keep talking about it, but its not *supported* by anything. Making unsupported assertions is a very bad debating practice.

quote:
The protestant perspective as the article said which I bet many didn't read but want to say "OPINIONS", ignore in its explanations describes how "such a conception of salvation is very naive." Christianity is not a religion of opinion.
I offer biblical support for my opinions you offer circular reasoning and link to articles which are equally vague in their support.

quote:
Nit pick all you want, in the end you take responsibility for your actions.
Yes, I take full responsibility and am confident since the Holy Word of God backs me up(a point you have yet to refute). You, however, better get used to having a millstone around your neck because of all this false doctrine you are spouting out. May God have mercy on your soul.

I sadly say as well that you, warsong, are a poor debater in the classical sense, and your vague allusions and circular reasoning have shown your naivety in both your own belief and your ability to communicate it. I've come to believe that your posts are like heathen prayers "think that they shall be heard for their much speaking."

I pray you will be humble enough to seek the truth as it stands on its own.


------------------
Sam Washburn

[This message has been edited by samw3 (edited February 08, 2007).]




Posts:
From:
Registered:
Welcome said the spider to the fly. You make it so easy for me and harder on yourself.

Simon here is some more history lessons for you to read. Sorry for all the errors on the page since CCN does not function right.
(Origins of Christian views before Christ!)
http://www.christiancoders.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000233.html


Sam==
Yes you can look at the link too, but don't try to dispute history as well since next thing you will try to dispute what 1+1 is.
Some funny things you say, but you know you are giving me more ammo against your points. You ask for sources and I give then you ask, so go figure. Maybe I have to take it slow on you since you are obviously set in you ways and ignore logic sine as one link said its thinking naive. You know you donít have enough evidence of proof but it is fun to talk about it, but it is kind of boring when you donít pay attention and ignore the points and then ask for a question. Kind of like a student asking the teacher what 1+1 is and the teacher answer and the student asks again while not paying attention the first time. I replied with plenty of into, links, and audio, the problem is that not even Christ can make you understand it seems, but is that what you are waiting for? Christ doesnít do everything for you, you are mainly responsible so donít put the responsibility on others since that is not the proper, logical, or Christian way.

Ok let me try to explain in more direct and simple on the rest. So you think people should fend for themselves and only rely on the Holy Spirit and ignore others? So then that is the same care with Gnostics that were taken out as well. Are you saying they are a good Christian sect? Are you saying Mormons to marry many women are good too? Are you saying homosexual priests that say they get the Holy Spirit are good too? The Holy Spirit is with the church which Christ wanted to make, so are you saying Christ failed to make the church since its is bad? Are you saying Christ is wrong? So the protestants that killed hundreds of thousands for assuming the other burning witches was proper since they know better for taking the bible into their own hand while the Orthodox church didnít do that? Wow then that must be a real inspiration maybe we should do that again? The original church didnít allow women priests so were the apostles wrong not to and the modern protestant churches are right to have a women head of the sect, church, community, or whatever its twisted around to be called? So you donít need the bible, history, pray, to celebrate Easter, Christian, to do the cross since they are evil were helped made by tradition? So you do what secularists do mostly in your daily routine more than what the early church did? Well if you answer yes then secularists love you so maybe you wanted that kind of love, but remember donít do the cross since the bible didnít say how to do it. If you are PERFECT then you donít need help or practice in doing Christian virtue.

Itís not because the priest said so itís because you see it in the action. As I said bearing good fruit and you should recognize them from their deeds. I guess protestant and Catholics killing one another because they see the other as witches was a good thing. Was attacking other Christian sects good? Letís not forget about the protestant and catholic communities how there is a separation and if one crosses the others territory they get physically attacked, maybe thatís a Christian thing too? If that is Christian might as well call it Muslim or Judaic if Christian sects what to be fanatical and act unchristian. Priests have experience and went to school, so are you saying you are better or equal? If so then you might be a good rocket science and brain surgeon since you dabble in them and donít need the 7 year education and 2000 year experience. Or maybe you are saying that Christ abandoned people since Protestantism was not around before 500 years and they are more connected with something so far and long time ago. I hope you donít say next that you know what the dinosaurs thought as well. But itís the same equivalence, or maybe you can answer me what the other side of the universe thinks since time and space are irrelevant to you? You have not answered me yet who your founder of your church is, is it King Hennery the 8th that murdered over tens of thousands of his people as the founder or Christ like the orthodox church? . As the bible says donít build your house on sand. Itís crazy that many follow him and you think many can be saved but the doors to heaven are not wide enough despite you want them to be. But I guess you have more compassion than Christ and that there is blasphemous wouldnít you agree. Speaking of which what do you have original or is it all made? As a rabbi said a religion that requires less is less. And in that case you see more loose things happening and you can notice this in history which you even admitted before but are afraid to put them together. I am not questioning your faith but you that the means justify the ends and not the ends justifying the means as was the ideology of the protestant religion throughout its life span. If you want to talk about religion better I told you where to ask since I am human and I error and I am not as nice as a priest and neither are you.

You ask for credible sources but I though opinion is what you go on. Now you are just being hypocritical. I gave links but you are afraid to read it seems. The real question is why do you fear the answer? Is it because you have spend over 30 years of your life being wrong? If thatís the reason then better to be wrong and be right later on than be always wrong. There is no shame of you being a fool, since you are human and you error. You are not perfect and you are no better than Christ, the apostles, or saints. I know you think you are just as good as the saints as you said but that kind of comment doesnít show you are humble and the saints were humble enough to all admit that they were not good and worse than the next while you think you are equal. Ok you make you feel comfortable let me tell you that you are nothing, you are just a little spec of nothing tough out history, and even if you did something you are still nothing, and if anything you can be worse. So now as yourself am I wrong and humble, or are you pound and you know it all? Sorry to be so blunt but your head can be in the clouds since what you say is illogical and naive. Donít blame me you wanted me to take the bible into my own hands. Just because you think you are good look at the stats of how the sects have done more bad than good or do you blind yourself from the truth since u want to see only good which is still a lie(sin). Donít worry I donít hate you I just think you know nothing, just like everyone else and just like myself.

The links give biblical quotes but I guess you need to reread them, you are allowed to reread, donít worry no one will hurt you. You could even ask questions to them but again I know you are afraid and donít want to look for answers since you feel confident with a lot of pride in you. How about you quote one biblical quote they mention as a baby step. Come on donít lie and say there was not as you stated.

You should take your own advice. You might say I have false doctrine but what fruits has your sect done? You even admit that the protestant sect is getting weaker and diluting its moral fabric every year since they have no good foundation or get encouraged to do moral values since they lack tradition. Many become Protestants because for silly reasons, even some churches in the early 1900 came about since many fear that they had demons in them, or they have ghosts in their homes. Itís like Salem witches that the Christians are all deluded and think the holy spirit told them to kill 1/3 of the Christians to blame everyone on others than practice to do what is right to not let bad happen. No wonder Protestants in the US are not doing as well as Orthodox and Catholics since they have no structure despite many have a foot hold in the country more. The funny thing is that many know that and many leave since immorality comes form protestant countries mostly which they sell it to other countries. Its not my fault more Protestants are converting to orthodoxy since they have a spiritual hunger and donít eat spiritual McDonalds every super bowl. If people want to listen then they learn and so many get it wrong then ask me for all the answers as if I am a experienced priest with 7 years of theology. I donít want you to be my pharmacist so I donít want you to be a spiritual advisor since you know far less. So as little as you assume I have I showed you the way but you bust decide to learn which I know your side but you know NOTHING of Holy tradition, the church, or history. When you are humble to admit you donít know it all then do ask but until them you donít seem to be doing well, and deep down you know it. If you want to ask a priest go ahead but I donít need to know and that only benefits you to know both sides of the story well before you make an *** out of yourself form assuming. As bad as some things might sound thatís the harsh truth, call it tough love.

-------- ANYWAY

Well at least we solve that case on what a secularist does. I hope you do less if that is what you want. Well you cant complain with my answer and you know you love it since as you said for me to take religion into my own hands and you fear the church that Christ made since Christ is not perfect which is an error on his part to make it and the priests which kind of odd that the apostles were bishops as well so try to ignore that part of history as well. But the bible didnít mention that so I guess the apostles were not priests as well in your take of things it seems. Good thing we have you to correct Christ and the apostles and that people were doomed before the protestant church came since Christ left us even though the bible says he never did. Whatís the name of your new organization Samís church, and the logic is to interpret as you want even though its different since there are many types of holy sprits that have their own opinions? Why not, many other Protestants made their own church with their own gimmicks every year which is why there is a new sect out that gives new rules to salvation. Well silly me I didnít know Christianity was an opinion sects my apologies. Maybe we should have a female lesbian that married her pet dog as part of the church as long as she believes in god and tells us the Holy Spirit is with her. But the psycho Marlin Manson was like that too.

But seriously in the end I unlike you admit I am not perfect and know I will misinterpret if I only rely on the bible. You on the other hand try to show you know more and that is your flaw. I admit people need help and need guidance while you try to take them away from guidance. Donít make people 2000 years ago stupid not to know this will happen since there are many examples of fake sects that have been taken down by the apostles which is why the thing you quotes was to only listen to the OFFICIAL source and not a made up one that a person made, interpreted, or passes along which can be lost over time. Translation helps preserve and not distort the original meaning. You donít notice many things that you do that are holy tradition as I pointed some examples, so if you are going to attack Christ attack him properly and throw everything he did than some things he did away since your assumptions and lack of history, and information of the church as you have already shown many times in your wrong assumptions in what it does hurt your points already. Your pride blinds you. As I said I will post sooner or later about an example of tradition in a new post how it helps than hurts which can not avoid. In the end donít blame me you accept this kind of authority or self interpretation, so that would make you Ĺ right, or if we look into history then that would make you more wrong that right but you get the idea.

PS. What do you call Protestants and atheists watching the super bowl last week in America? There tradition. Lol
Well you cant blame me that they both have the same traditions that is further away form the early church. Itís a good thing they follow something since anything is better than trying to better ones self in Christiana traditions since how else can people be easily manipulated? So whenís the next witch hunt?

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 16:18 I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." "7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"
I may be outnumbered but not out gunned.

[This message has been edited by warsong (edited February 10, 2007).]

samw3

Member

Posts: 542
From: Toccoa, GA, USA
Registered: 08-15-2006
warsong, I am very happy as I mentioned previously. I have a deep-seated joy in my soul. I commune with my Lord (Jesus Christ) on a constant basis. I have submitted my life to Him. I am not set in my ways as much as I am trying to be constantly seated in God's ways. Not perfect by any means, but definitely committed to following God as He actively reveals himself to me through the Bible.

If you really want to help me understand, please show me where the Bible speaks about these doctrines you believe. The passages you have already shared do not support your view. They are simply taken out of the context of the message as a whole that Christ or the apostle was saying.

My beliefs are not just my own ideas but are rooted in the Bible, and unless you can show me a scripture passage that contextually adds validity to your beliefs I have to throw them out just like all the other twisted schisms of people who claim to follow Christ (of whom you have detailed in your posts).

I do not appreciate being credited with the actions of "protestants" in general. I do not call myself a protestant. I am simply (very simply) a follower of Christ. And it will be by Christ alone that I will stand on the judgment day.

One of the themes through biblical history, even in the oldest books, has been that there is a remnant, a small subset of true believers among a throng of those who call themselves God's people. And the gates of hell will not prevail against this "church"(remnant) of God. The word for church in Matt. 16:18 is Ekklesia(transliterated). Here is what Strong's concordance says about the meaning of Ekklesia:

quote:
an assembly of the people convened at the public place of the council for the purpose of deliberating; any gathering or throng of men assembled by chance, tumultuously

Jesus was talking about an assembly of those who profess the same faith that Simon Peter professed just one verse earlier, that "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God" He is not talking about "Apostolic Succession". He mentions nothing about a succession of authority. Even if you say that Peter was indeed the foundation and not his faith alone, there is nothing in these verses saying that a succession would take place. Its just made up.

One of Jesus' primary messages was to reveal that though God is infinitely complex, his plan for mankind is simple one. This is revealed in Jesus' teaching about the law being summed up in one commandment of love (Matt.22:36-40) It can also be seen in Jesus' disdain for all the ridiculous traditions that the pharisees maintained that gave them a "spiritual edge" on the populace at large. Jesus revealed that even a child could have a direct intimate relationship with God through him. It isn't complex.

The problem with such a message is that it is counter-intuitive to the way the wicked heart of man thinks. Mankind thinks that he needs to somehow prove himself to God. To earn his keep even. Apostle Paul shows this to be self-righteousness in Romans 3 when he is dealing with the Judaizers' false doctrines.

When Christ spoke his message by the Holy Spirit, the pharisees also said he had an unholy spirit, and that is when Christ warned them of the unpardonable sin. I now warn you equally. The one true Holy Spirit is my guide through the scriptures, if I submit myself to Him. I cannot vouch for anyone else (Marylin Manson, or lesbians with dogs), but I don't ask you to hear my words. I ask you to read the bible in context. I am only showing you what is there in the text.

I have admitted that I am not perfect. But, the perfect Holy Spirit of God is the interpreter of His word for me. But, somehow I get the idea that you think this is some sort of joke or something. I am not joking around, or using the words "Holy Spirit" as leverage to support my own personal views. He really does personally assist anyone who trusts in Christ.

Again I ask you, Do you have the Holy Spirit? Have you been "endued with power from on high" as Luke 24:49 says? I would hate for you to miss out on this. Really. I'm serious. I'm not being cutting or sarcastic. Jesus also clearly states that we need to humbly ask God for the Spirit(Luke 11:13). Its not just an automatic thing as another sect believes.

And the benefits are incredible! Please read these scriptures.

Romans 8:26 says "Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered."

John 14:16 - "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever;"

John 14:26 - "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you."

John 15:26 - "When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,"

John 16:7 - "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you."

John 16:13 - "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."

Mark 13:11 - "But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost."

And that is just a few! I pray that God will open your eyes to this truth, and that you will be filled with His Spirit(Eph 5:18)

May the Lord's name be honored and God bless you.

------------------
Sam Washburn




Posts:
From:
Registered:
You reply to fast; now I know you donít pay attention. Honestly there is a lot to know.

You say ďplease show me where the Bible speaks about these doctrinesĒ and ďThey are simply taken out of the context of the message as a wholeĒ. Now you have over 5 parts that were stated about tradition do why not start there about tradition to reply to? You are just as guilty s taking it out of context and you more of a reason to do so. I did show you where to get the answer if you ďreallyĒ wanted to know, since I am not a theologian and I do not take the official stance of the church, I am talking to you mostly in logical terms. I also just lie you did not memories the bible to quote every proper passage. You and I do not know the original language as the Orthodox Church has it and the original bible. What you are referring to is an interpretation translated and reinterpreted again and with so many middle men you are about to have a lack of communication. Thing are not black and white as you want them to be.

I know all your argues but you do not know mine or the Orthodox Church and you have to admit that it is not a fair in how you are assuming. So when you buy a product you read the full description of one product and while not knowing the other well? Please donít tell me you are buying windows Vista so soon :í( lol As I stated some points in this post. http://www.christiancoders.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000250.html

You have to admit that the early church followed traditions. You have to admit you follow some traditions which you are nit picking as I gave some examples. Getting married in a church was traditional and the christian way so why did the Protestants throw that out and get married in unholy places like for a drive though in Sin City Las Vegas. Now Tradition keeps things in tact as you can see and Christianity is not taken on the way side at a drive though or a novelty.

Apostolic Succession is something for you that was also done in the early church which many Christians abandon as well. http://orthodoxwiki.org/Apostolic_succession Do agree with the logic of what the link says?????? Obviously that site doesnít explain it fully which I have stated in another longer topic in here about orthodoxy. Catholics donít have it anymore since they were excommunicated. Just like anyone else that does bad things and says they are Christians. While non orthodox sects are considered Christian despite all the non Christian things they push for. Here is another post with many useful links which can keep you busy for a few days. (no need to read the long post, I am just saying how many things have been stated before) http://www.christiancoders.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000172.html
ďďApostolic Succession. The Apostolic Succession is a very important sign which identifies the True Church. It means that Jesus Christ blessed His apostles to carry on His work, and the apostles blessed their students, which in turn blessed the bishops, and which blessed the priests and so on. This way, the blessing and therefore the approval originated by Jesus Christ, is on each priest in the Church.
The Apostolic Succession exists in the Orthodox Church and in the Roman Church. The Protestant Churches do not have Apostolic Succession. This is one of the reasons why in the view of the Orthodox Church they are not Churches, but only Christian Communities.Ē (Christian time line) http://www.dorogadomoj.com/de13ihc.html So you have a Christian community and not a church or EKKLESIA as you stated. Even the apostles was head of the church/ekklesia . Even they help establish the church and the church leaders with the apostles helped make the bible. Any way you slice non orthodox sects are not even close to the original church. If you read the link about the originis of Christianity you will see that they had no reason to change the church since Christianity was similar to their own beliefs as the unknown God example indicates and the many quotes from the ancient philosophers. Unlike others that put their own spin to mix it with their own traditions which is BAD.
You may not want to be known as a protestant but that is what you are spun off from weather you like it or not. I know you disagree with many of their actions but itís their lack of traditions that make them do all those bad things as stated. Yes a child can have a direct relationship with God and the Orthodox Church knows this, but it seems you are assuming AGAIN since you do not know orthodoxy. Admit that you are assuming since you do not know enough. Your title of the post is generally that you do not know why and since you donít know you attack which is kind of ignorant. And when I say to go ask a theologian you cower away thinking that you know it all when you obviously say a lot of error. You ask a question I point you to the right direction.
You say that the Holy Spirit is in scriptures only? Really where does it say that in the bible? Come on stop lying. Just because you want to hop with one leg and you make some progress doesnít mean that the best way to do it. Interpreting the bible by yourself only is a sin you know. I quoted the passage before but I guess you read it. Many Christians believe in Christ but many will fail. You can not do it alone sine you are not strong enough since your imperfection prevents you and you know you are not. Do not be naÔve, since so many have said what you said and have done many atrocities. So as you see itís not a stable solution and it is mostly not a viable one to only go with ONE part of the bible and ignore the rest. Anyway you wanted quotes and so quotes are the links.
Ok logically there are how many Christians? Letís say 1 billion metaphorically and if everyone took the bible to be interpreted in their perspective will they mostly see eye to eye? Are they all going as one or separate? Can an individual with the help of the Holy Spirit unify how all people think to work as one just like an ant colony would work efficiently? As Christ said not to separate the church but with so many personal interpretations it is more volatile and dangerous that safe and progressive. You have to agree.

Anyway I try to say very little but it turns out that I say over a page of info. :- | So try not to reply so fast sine you have a lot of information you read. Try not to assume as much.
Have fun

------------------
"The conversion of a savage to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery." Shaw "Hell is paved with good intentions, not with bad ones"
"Matthew 16:18 I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." "7 21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven"
:pI may be outnumbered but not out gunned.