1st Cen. Christianity - One Organization

by StandFirm 144 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • JustHuman14

    All East Orthodox Churches are autonomus. We have the Greek Ortodox Church, Romanian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Georgian Orthodox, Antiochian, Syrian, Jerusalim, Cyprus, American, just to name a few of the Orthodox Patriarch Churches around the World.

    All though they are autonomus with their own Archbishop, but all Orthodox Churches are unified under the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, since he is the head of the entire Orthodox Church.

    When I mean the head it has nothing to do with Pope, just to clear this, he is only the Presiding Overseer of the Church

  • PSacramento

    Understood, thanks justhuman14.

  • Honesty

    Band on the Run sez:

    Note that the thread starter is AWOL.

    That is SOP for StandFirm.

    On other boards when StandFirm is debunked he runs down the nearest rabbit hole and hides until he thinks up another topic to spam the board with.

    We refer to him as StandFlaccid because he droops a lot.

  • botchtowersociety

    I enjoyed your posts Maksym and JustHuman. That is essentially how I would describe it as well.

  • ixthis

    Hello everyone, I am new to the forum and really only signed up to make on reply and that reply is to Prodigal Son. I wanted to say to you PS: Prodigal Son, do not worry about [Saint] Constantine but worry about your own salvation! The Nicene Creed states belief in One God, the Father Almighty, one Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit - Constantine is not mentioned within the Creed recited by the Orthodox Christians around the world. Reading your historiography surrounding Constantine I feel that it is merely a regurgitation of the Protestant anti-Catholic line ... its flawed major premise is: since the primitive Church did not develop in the way you thought it should, all subsequent Christian history is the history of an apostate or non-existent Church ... it really becomes tiresome to have to defend historical facts because Constantine did not make Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. That was done many years after his death by an edict of Theodosius I dated 27 February 380. If the 'authorities' you use and read cannot get basic facts right, then what sort of authorities on the matter are they? Infact, if God could use pagan rulers like Nebuchadnezzar to tear down Israel, and use Cyrus and Darius in His purpose in restoring and rebuilding Israel, why do we have trouble with the fact that God used Constantine to help build up His Church? If God was sovereign over the doings of Israel, how can He not be sovereign over the doings of His Church? The main issue with Protestants (and the rest of us following their thinking) postulating that the Church went astray shortly after the apostles died, and was not restored until modern times, is the fact that this completely denies that God is competent to protect His own people ... it infers that God is unable to make sure that there is a witness to Truth and Righteousness in every generation. It infers that He is unable to direct the growth and development of His own body. I am not one who desires to call God incompetent. As far as Church structure we read about bishops and elders in the New Testament and if you want to read authentic historical material try reading the writings of Ignatius of Antioch the antiochan bishop of the latter half of the first century and contemporary of John the Evangelist ... as Ignatius of Antioch taught before his martyrdom, "It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptise or to celebrate a love Feast" (Ante-nicene Fathers vol 1.90). When christianity was persecuted people held worship in houses ... the oldest excavated house-church being in Dura Europos Syria dating to 220 A.D. - a quintessential Orthodox house church ... oh hey, that too must be a lie but are archaeologists "in" on the early church propaganda ya think? So, let us share some more truths about Constantine. Professor Emeritus G.D. Metallinos writes: "It is a known fact that the stance of historians with respect to Constantine the Great is a contradictory one. For some, his life is an enigma and he himself is a sullen murderer and opportunist, while for others, his life is a huge miracle of History. This is due to the predominance of ideological criteria and a procession of assessments that are devoid of historical sources. Among the worst tragedies in the arena of History, which lead exclusively to the self-abrogation of the historian and his research, is the handling of History at will so that History is thus used to prove events, which History however is baseless and lacking in proof ..." continue reading this article here http://www.oodegr.com/english/paganismos/sykofanties/kwnstantinos_ist_alithia1.htm The next point I wanted to discuss is your quote to Blavatsky, let us compare the Orthodox professor with Blavatsky. Who needs Paganism when you have the hedonism of modern pop culture? Alas, this is where the esoterism of theosophy lies, in its secrecy and in people's unwillingness to recognize it and it's evils! After forming Lucifer Trust in 1920's, Bailey changed the name of her publishing company to Lucis Trust, which now enjoys "Consultative Status" with the United Nations, which permits it to have a close working relationship with the U.N., including a seat on the weekly sessions, but most importantly, influence with powerful business and national leaders throughout the world.", allowing it to implement the New World Order through these ten strategies, as written by Helena Blavatsky, the disciple of whom Bailey is ... By what authority do these people speak of Christianity? To help you out I will utter the answer for you ... yes, it is Lucifer. They speak about Christianity through the authority of Lucifer and as such, as the father of lies, they too are not to be trusted sources of information that will lead your soul towards its salvation ... Lucifer's foundation or Christs? Pick which side you prefer ... May God Bless you so that your desire is for the Truth and that which is eternally salvific for your soul.

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run


    Thank you for your comments. I've attended several Eastern rite churches in my neighborhood. It is nice to see the wider church, beyond the West. If nothing else, it illuminates Western theology by the contrast.

    Among my circle, a passing interest in the Orthodox Church is considered very cool and sophiscticated in a manner that the Roman Catholic Church is not.

    My Anglican confirmation sponsor was a member of the Tolstoy Foundation. He was a subdean at a major cathedral. Whenever he lectured us or presented meditations, we learned how the Eastern church's way was preferable. In fact, by the time confirmation class ended, I knew little about Anglicanism and much about the Russian church.

    I lived in the East Village of NY surrounded by Eastern rite churches on every block. It is hard to find a church here in the suburbs.

  • TheListener

    There is a lot of posts and a lot of text in this thread.

    I didn't see anyone mention the fact that Paul knew of the injunction not to eat things strangled or sacrificed to idols. However, several times in his teachings at a later point he says it is a conscience matter and acceptable.

    If this was discussed already please forgive.

  • Marvin Shilmer
    Marvin Shilmer

    Earlier I asked StandFirm:

    "-- Were there true Christians in the centuries leading to the 19th and 20th centuries?

    -- If so, were those true Christians part of one administrative and functional structure used by God?

    -- If so, what was that one administrative and functional structure used by God?"

    StandFirm writes:

    “There were Christians in the intervening centuries. And they did organize themselves in some cases, as best they could.”

    During “the intervening centuries” was there one organization of Christians or was there more than one organization of Christians?

    StandFirm writes:

    “Remember, though, that those were the centuries of apostasy, of the wheat being hidden by the weeds.”

    And according to Watchtower that is no longer the case. Right? And, if Watchtower says it then it must be true. Right?

    StandFirm writes:

    “Wouldn't it be better to imitate the 1st century's spiritual prosperity?”

    Imitating prosperity is not prosperity any more than imitation gold is gold.

    Should we respond to theuninspired decrees of Watchtower's governing body the same as we would have to the inspired decrees of the first century governing body?

    StandFirm writes:

    “Thus, what you bring up is a red herring.”

    The questions I have posed to you are no red herring. To the contrary, answering the questions I have asked of you presents a threat to your notions of organization. Now how about answering the questions asked and let readers decide as they will.

    The Christ did not teach a religion. He taught a way or life.

    Marvin Shilmer

  • ProdigalSon

    Thank you for your concern and kind words, ixthis.... but I don't believe any of us need saving, as we were never lost. This will become evident very soon.

    Ciao bella!

  • ixthis

    Well, thank you Prodigal for your sweet reply ... I understand how you might believe you are not in need of saving but would you consider the questions I have posed of you? There are a lot more issues and points I was conversing with you than that one ...

Share this