I got <banned> for this ...

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

sculleywr
Umm, go back, read some history. The split was officially made in 1054 when Rome issued the papal bull of excommunication. The reasons were this:
1. The Eastern Churches refused to accept the universal jurisdiction of the Pope.
2. The Eastern Churches refused to accept the Filioque, an addition to both the Creed and the Scripture that made the Spirit less than the Father and Son, rather than equal to.
The issues have, since then, grown in number. It is curious to note that 90% of Protestant groups still carry many Roman doctrines that differ from Orthodox. In many ways, Protestants are closer to Rome than they think.
GE:
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=67226909#post67226909
A very worthwhile post to have read indeed!
In fact, for some time now I have argued for the total close in ranks in all of Christianity from about the time the Roman Catholic church lifted its anathema on Bible societies and hijacked the lot to further its own ends.
That was a most clever and effective move which caught the Protestants so unawares they are still not seeing it hundred years and nearly a quarter century after.
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=67226893&posted=1#post67226893
ChristianForums.com Message
You have been banned for the following reason:
mandatory mentoring in MSC
Date the ban will be lifted: Never

 

[Rebel]

It is curious to note that 90% of Protestant groups still carry many Roman doctrines that differ from Orthodox. In many ways, Protestants are closer to Rome than they think.

Yes, indeed, and I've been saying the same thing.

 

[Salty]

... It is curious to note that 90% of Protestant groups still carry many Roman doctrines that differ from Orthodox. In many ways, Protestants are closer to Rome than they think.

SO!

Or I could say that the RCC has some beliefs that Protestants, as well as Baptists believe.

So in some ways, Roman Catholics are closer to Protestants than they think.

 

[Revmitchell]

It is an idiotic statement. It is too vague and ignores the fact that not every single thing in the Catholic church is wrong. The use of the word orthodox is rather odd and seems to be used simply as a justification with no foundation.

 

[Rebel]

The point that GE made is a valid one. The RCC and Protestants have almost the same view of God, man, sin - including original sin - and the atonement.

 

[Revmitchell]

Not only is it not valid it is absurd.

 

[Rebel]

Not only is it not valid it is absurd.

Only in your mind.

What I said is true: The RCC and Protestants have almost the same view of God, man, sin - including original sin - and the atonement. Both groups' views are based in juridical, legalist concepts of God and salvation. To find differences in these areas, one must look to some Anabaptists, Quakers, and Eastern Orthodox.

 

[Revmitchell]

Only in your mind.

What I said is true: The RCC and Protestants have almost the same view of God, man, sin - including original sin - and the atonement.

umm...please do not respond to me per your request of me. I would hate for you to be hypocritical.

 

[Rebel]

umm...please do not respond to me per your request of me. I would hate for you to be hypocritical.

I said don't respond unless you can do so in a civil manner. But if you'd rather I not respond to you regardless, I'll follow your request.

 

[McCree79]

Only in your mind.

What I said is true: The RCC and Protestants have almost the same view of God, man, sin - including original sin - and the atonement. Both groups' views are based in juridical, legalist concepts of God and salvation. To find differences in these areas, one must look to some Anabaptists, Quakers, and Eastern Orthodox.

Rebel,

I am not familiar with the modern RCC belief in Original sin, but I am of Augustine's. I do agree with him and I am Protestant. I however think I am in the minority in the SBC churches I attended. Most(I speak from my experience) Protestants actually have to idea on the doctrine. So, while I would fall into that category of original sin doctrine, I don't know if most Protestants do.

The biggest issues that Protestants have is the use of "tradition" to Trump scripture ....and the abuse sacraments, obviously.

 

[Rebel]

Rebel,

I am not familiar with the modern RCC belief in Original sin, but I am of Augustine's. I do agree with him and I am Protestant. I however think I am in the minority in the SBC churches I attended. Most(I speak from my experience) Protestants actually have to idea on the doctrine. So, while I would fall into that category of original sin doctrine, I don't know if most Protestants do.

The biggest issues that Protestants have is the use of "tradition" to Trump scripture ....and the abuse sacraments, obviously.

I would confidently say that you are not in the minority. They may not have any idea about the doctrine, but they do believe something, and what they've been taught is the common view held in all of Western Christendom, whether Catholic or Protestant.

 

[Reformed]

I got &lt;banned&gt; for this ...

The point that GE made is a valid one. The RCC and Protestants have almost the same view of God, man, sin - including original sin - and the atonement.

So? Rome's error is not in those areas in which they are considered orthodox. Its error is in those areas that are not: papal infallibility and ex cathedral, baptismal regeneration, veneration of saints, doctrine of Mary, prayers for the dead, indulgences, shall I go on?

The Reformation began with the intent of reforming the errors of the church, not to fix what was right.

 

[Revmitchell]

sculleywr
Umm, go back, read some history. The split was officially made in 1054 when Rome issued the papal bull of excommunication. The reasons were this:
1. The Eastern Churches refused to accept the universal jurisdiction of the Pope.
2. The Eastern Churches refused to accept the Filioque, an addition to both the Creed and the Scripture that made the Spirit less than the Father and Son, rather than equal to.
The issues have, since then, grown in number. It is curious to note that 90% of Protestant groups still carry many Roman doctrines that differ from Orthodox. In many ways, Protestants are closer to Rome than they think.
GE:
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=67226909#post67226909
A very worthwhile post to have read indeed!
In fact, for some time now I have argued for the total close in ranks in all of Christianity from about the time the Roman Catholic church lifted its anathema on Bible societies and hijacked the lot to further its own ends.
That was a most clever and effective move which caught the Protestants so unawares they are still not seeing it hundred years and nearly a quarter century after.
http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=67226893&posted=1#post67226893
ChristianForums.com Message
You have been banned for the following reason:
mandatory mentoring in MSC
Date the ban will be lifted: Never

Why do you come to this board with your misbehavior at another board?

 

[Reformed]

I got &lt;banned&gt; for this ...

And may I add that the differences between Rome and Reformed Theology are irreconcilable. There is no room to "give". That issue was settled hundreds of years ago.

 

[Rebel]

So? Rome's error is not in those areas in which they are considered orthodox. Its error is in those areas that are not: papal infallibility and ex cathedral, baptismal regeneration, veneration of saints, doctrine of Mary, prayers for the dead, indulgences, shall I go on?

The Reformation began with the intent of reforming the errors of the church, not to fix what was right.

In those areas that I listed, Rome is not "orthodox". Neither are they "Orthodox", as in Eastern Orthodox. The Eastern Orthodox had the original views in those areas - the views of the early churches and the scriptures. The Magisterial Reformers didn't go far enough in their reforms.

 

[Tom Bryant]

In those areas that I listed, Rome is not "orthodox". Neither are they "Orthodox", as in Eastern Orthodox. The Eastern Orthodox had the original views in those areas - the views of the early churches and the scriptures. The Magisterial Reformers didn't go far enough in their reforms.

Of course they didn't go far enough. But what they did get right was areas that needed to be corrected immediately such as sola fide and sola scriptura.

I am not saying you are doing this, but I think they carried over some wrongs, but to act like Luther, Calvin and Zwingli should have corrected everything is to put more on their shoulders than God did.

And, btw, I am not reformed.

 

[Rebel]

Of course they didn't go far enough. But what they did get right was areas that needed to be corrected immediately such as sola fide and sola scriptura.

I am not saying you are doing this, but I think they carried over some wrongs, but to act like Luther, Calvin and Zwingli should have corrected everything is to put more on their shoulders than God did.

And, btw, I am not reformed.

I guess God put that on the shoulders of the Radical Reformers. And I'm not saying that in a smart-aleck way.

 

[The Biblicist]

It is an idiotic statement. It is too vague and ignores the fact that not every single thing in the Catholic church is wrong. The use of the word orthodox is rather odd and seems to be used simply as a justification with no foundation.

I don't understand why you think the term "orthodox" which has reference to the split between the western and eastern Catholic Church is odd or used simply as a justificaiton with no foundation. At the time this split occurred there were real differences between the eastern and western branches and in regard to immersion instead of sprinkling, the rejection of the Papal office, the rejection of images, marriage of priests, etc., it would seem the term "orthodox" would be quite fitting if you lived in that era and based on those differences?

 

[The Biblicist]

Of course they didn't go far enough.

They also opposed the more evangelical Anabaptists who rejected the state church concept and rejected infant baptism.

 

[The Biblicist]

And may I add that the differences between Rome and Reformed Theology are irreconcilable. There is no room to "give". That issue was settled hundreds of years ago.

I don't know about that! The inconsistencies in Reformation Theology (infant baptism, state church ecclesiology) give a foothold for reconciliation with Rome as they are consistent with the overall teaching of Rome in regard to their concept of Augustinian soterology.