The definition of Christianity...

Yes (provided 'hell' = sheol). That's basic Christian orthodoxy and has been propounded for c1800 years, so no further comment from me. What's your point?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Who is the heretic who voted no?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Sure is!

MEE

 

</font>[/QUOTE]__________________________________________________

I could not agree with this for two reasons.

1st; It is poisoned by the inclusion of "See Calvin". Calvin is not a reliable exspositor of Christian Truth in my opinion. Orthodox Christian faith was re-written by Calvin, IMO.

2nd; The wording of "holy catholic church" is suspect, IMO. Had it been worded thus; "The church is the Body of Christ and is visible in the local congregation throughout the world"; I could also agree with that. As it is, there is too much room for they of the RCC persuasion to be lumped into Orthodox christian faith, which I reject. The RCC has never been Orthodox, IMO.

I find the epithet, "heretic" to be knee jerk and therefore ridiculous. LOL

The rest of the statements as they appear, I can agree with.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

If there had been copywrites in the 1st century, then the Jerusalem Church would have owned the name, "Christian," and anyone who wanted to use it would have to have permission of the Jerusalem Church.

Lacking copywrites, the Ecumenical Orthodox Catholic Christian Church created the Ecumenical Confessions. Anyone who conforms to the confessions is nominally "Christian." Only God can seperate the sheep from the goats.

 

No.

Without wishing to take anything away from the Apostles' Creed, if it said it all we would not have the Nicene, Athanasian, Chalcedonian, etc etc.

It's a great start, but to quote the bloke that used to compare Sale Of The Century "More information?"

God gave the Holy Bible, not the Holy Pamphlet

Probably a few extended statements of various quality here: http://snipurl.com/crxo

 

Your question is whether or not these statements are consistently orthodox Christian professions of faith. While some may say that they don't include everything they think SHOULD be included, it seems to me that these ARE the basics of Christian belief, and they're definitely consistent with orthodox Christian tenets.

I am learning from this BB, however, that there is a huge, huge, HUGE disagreement--even among Baptists--about all the "details", though. I am interested to see what point you intend to make when you get enough comments and poll results.

Terri

 

I voted "yes", but like Pete suggested it doesn't go far enough. I would submit that the Nicene Creed and the Chalcedonian Definition are more specific "boundary markers" for orthodox Christian belief.

 

Oops, tragic-pizza, we must have posted at the same time. That must have BEEN your point.

I was brought up in a Baptist church literally from the time I was in my mother's womb, saved at age 9, was in church every moment the doors were open. "Fell away" from the church (but NOT my savior) for many years after I turned 20 (due to a horrible situation in a church that left me badly disillusioned at a key juncture in my life.)

Long story short, after many years, I'm getting BACK to trying to find a home church....and I found this BB in the process of my searching. I have been literally STUNNED at the level/decibel of disagreement, argumentation, and accusations of heresy and lack of salvation when someone disagrees with another's viewpoint. And THAT's among the avowed BAPTISTS. I honestly had no idea that there were so many disagreements in the body. It has been hard to "sort out" much that I have read herein.

And this reminds me that I wanted to start a thread with questions on the ecumenical movement!

Thanks for your posts--they're always intellectually and spiritually stimulating and challenging.

Terri

 

TP, it's hard mate because as I said I really don't want to take anything away from the Apostles Creed...

If I do have to give an example though:


From Apostle's Creed: and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord

Matthew 16:16
In answer Simon Peter said: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Acts 28:31
preaching the kingdom of God to them and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with the greatest freeness of speech, without hindrance.


From Creed: I believe in the Holy Spirit

Hebrews 3:7
For this reason, just as the holy spirit says: "Today if YOU people listen to his own voice...


Verses taken from New World Translation

 

I would agree with Pete and DT. While a good start, this confession does not go far enough for today's christendom.
The problem AISI is this. Too much of what passes for Orthodoxy is not Orthodox. This "creed" does not go far enough and is accepted by many who are NOT Orthodox in light of the Scriptures as we have them today. For example, there is no statement as to the inspiration of Scripture and its authority in all matters of faith and practice. The omission of which leaves room for "advanced revelation" or "traditionalism" to rear its ugly head. While it is a general creed which many DO agree and affirm, it simply is not sufficient. IMO

TP; I fully understood the dating of this creed and recognized it as such. What I did not find in the original creed is your use of "see Calvin". LOL

I did notice the small "c" in catholic, but will remain steadfast in my objection that it leaves room for the RCC to "prove" their assertion that they are THE ONLY TRUE CHURCH.

In HIS service;
Jim