youtube.com
There is only ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
That is the Orthodox Church, founded by Christ, which the gates of hell shall not prevail against.
When you are confronted by temptation, remember what the monk says here: youtube.com
This is an Orthodox pastebin that addresses the questions of Catholics and atheists and Muslims and Jews and Protestants and liberals, along with a reading list that provides links: pastebin.com
Other urls found in this thread:
mega.nz
twitter.com
Christ didn't found any church.
Matthew 16:18
>And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
If he didn't directly found it then he, at the very least, commissioned Peter to do so.
Christ didn't found a church, fucknut.
>written in a book thousands of years ago
>no credible sources
>bible could all be made up, we'll never know for sure
>taken as literal facts
>the definition of ignorance
>written in a book thousands of years ago
I MEAN C'MON, IT'S THE CURRENT YEAR
Yeah, he found a Jewish cult in Israel, Catholic church was founded by Romans you fucking moron.
> american
> orthodox
nice try
christfags how do i find god
every time i think about the concept of death i go full primal/panic attack mode and it freaks me the fuck out - the hope that heaven's a thing keeps me going. was raised christian but don't believe now.
do i just wait for a mid life crisis or what
When did Romans found it?
You do know there are a ton of Orthodox parishes over here, right? Heck, the Antiochian Church in America is mostly converts, 70% of their clergy are converts.
Try reading The Way of the Pilgrim
This. Antiochian orthodoxy is booming here. One of our father converted to orthodoxy from being a protestant pastor. I myself did the same. Russian orthodoxy is huge in alaska. An Greek somewhere else.
lol/10
or
yawn/10
take your pic
Listen, if it's any consolation, it is true that orthodoxy is less cucked than catholicism, I can definitely agree to that.
But, it definitely HAS NOT removed itself from post-christian Roman filth; I speak of degenerative corruption.
Christianity remains a religion birthed by Jews, who were polytheists before their "illumination". Faggotry, if you ask me.
Deus Vult.
if youre not a christian why do you even care about this you faggot?
OP, do you believe that heaven, hell, purgatory God, Lucifer, souls, etc, actually exist? Like when you die, your soul travels to one of those three places (or something approximating that)?
I guess what I'm getting at is that there's no evidence that any of that stuff actually exists. Why do you believe in it?
Romania has some serious problems with corruption, but most of the rest of the Church doesn't have that issue. Sure, we have some very corrupt clergy here any there, but it's not institutionalized at all, most clergy are on the level. Even the Romanian Church outside of Roman is fine, doesn't have any issues here in the U.S., because we don't have things over here like the priest being the accountant (accountability for parish funds is kept in the hands of a large council of laity of that parish).
Orthodox don't believe in Purgatory
Well, because I think there is good enough evidence for Christ's Resurrection, and on account of that, I am willing to take the rest on faith.
>2016
>not realizing that Gnosticism is the truth behind existence
What evidence is there for Christ's resurrection again?
It's in the OP pastebin
>He hasn't read The Case For Christ by Lee Strobbel
mega.nz
Orthodoxy is a pretty shit tier religion.
>There is only ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
>one
Orthodox have problems to gather at council, and with recognising which church is canonical (for example in ukraine).
>Orthodox don't believe in Purgatory
They belive in something very close to purgatory. Pic related.
>orthodoxy is booming here
Orthodox - 0,5% of US population
Jehovah's Witnesses - 0,8% of US population
Pic
It's gaining traction as people are converting alot.
Also what does the ladder have to do with Purgatory? It's not like if you fall off you get a "pain to win" deal out of it. Damnation or asention
Can you paste it out for me? All I found was this:
"But...was he really Resurrected?
The explain Christ's Resurrection, three explanations are generally employed. 1. It was a myth about him that gained momentum with time. 2. It was fabricated outright. 3. It was a mass delusion.
... (Excerpt too large to post) ...
All this, taken together, while not proof positive of Christ, makes it quite reasonable to affirm him."
This isn't too compelling.
The pastebin claims that the Apostles had no reason to lie. Really? They followed Jesus around for months and then he was killed. Of course they had a motive to lie about his resurrection. If they say he was resurrected, his teachings might live on, and if people believe he was resurrected, they could continue to spread his teachings.
OP, you said you there is good evidence for Christ's resurrection and that's why you believe the rest of it, but the word of Christ's followers does NOT count as good evidence for his resurrection. Do you have something more compelling?
stop denying Christ and go to church to pray NOW
>For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman Empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine provided religious toleration with the Edict of Milan in AD 313, effectively lifting the ban on Christianity. Later, in AD 325, Constantine called the Council of Nicea in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.
Constantine found that, with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse, not everyone would agree to forsake his or her religious beliefs to embrace Christianity. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities.
Yeah, sure mate.
The Roman Catholic Church uses the argument that Peter is the rock to which Jesus referred as evidence that it is the one true church. As we have seen, Peter's being the rock is not the only valid interpretation of this verse. Even if Peter is the rock in Matthew 16:18, this is meaningless in giving the Roman Catholic Church any authority. Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome. Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the other apostles. The New Testament does not describe Peter as being the “all authoritative leader” of the early Christian church. Peter was not the first pope, and Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church. The origin of the Catholic Church is not in the teachings of Peter or any other apostle. If Peter truly was the founder of the Roman Catholic Church, it would be in full agreement with what Peter taught (Acts chapter 2, 1 Peter, 2 Peter).
...