In what sense is the Christian Church "one"?

Originally posted by Komnenos I'm afraid here our ways part. As much as I like to discuss the Council of Nicaea or the Iconoclast schism, I can only discuss them as historical phenomena, which I believe is the only manner we should discuss this here.(Don't get me wrong, I don't want to censor anybody here) If you or somebody else believe in the workings of divine forces behind these events, is entirely up to you and you have all the right to do so, but in the end it all boils down to the age old conflict between simple faith and empirical investigation. While the political implications of the Nicene creed can be deducted from historical research, the notion that the holy Spirit was at work here, is an expression of speculative belief, and as such not debatable.

Couldn't agree with you more. I do believe that the workings of the Holy Spirit are debatable, but they must be debated within the discourse in which they exist. Once again, debating from extremely different premises is a formula for confusion and, ultimately, two people babbling on to themselves. I suppose we should try not to babble then...but it's so fun .

-Akolouthos

Edited by Akolouthos

Originally posted by Komnenos Didn't that have more to do with the fact that an iconodule ruler, Irene, came to the throne who threw her power and influence behind the cause? And iconoclasm came back, btw, and was only finally refuted by another Empress, Theodora, a few decades later.

A point but, perhaps not one that strikes to the heart of the issue. Aye, politics are a necessary part of determining doctrine, but I would not say that this denies the possibility that the Spirit could work through these means. The point I was making--and I do recognize that it is debatable--is that whether it be Arianism, Iconoclasm, Nestorianism, or any of a number of other heresies that have looked to triumph by political means, eventually they were refuted.

Originally posted by Cuauhtemoc As we can see, unity is possible but only if our beliefs come from the Word of God only. We must get rid of the manmade doctrines that have been added over the centuries. All who are willing to follow the Word of God and drop manmade ideas can be unified as Jesus said on His Word. The Holy Spirit guided the Apostle Paul to write that if the Word alone is preached as Jesus said, then one would have sound doctrine and the truth, please note the point in 2 Timothy 4:1-4. Here is a quote of the passage,

I think we, perhaps, do not disagree . I do think, however, we might have a different understanding of how the Word of God is to be interpreted--which gets to the heart of the question .

Originally posted by Cuauhtemoc As we can see from the passage Akolouthos, Christians are to preach the Word, whether it is popular or not. The Word is used interchangably with "sound doctrine" and with the "truth". Thus anything NOT found in the Word of God is an addition that is not sound and not truth. Thus clearly "unity" is found when we all decide to follow the Word of God, and that obviously means very great changes and the elimination of many manmade doctrines. How else Akolouthos can we be of the "same mind" as stated by the Apostle Paul as he wrote in 1 Corinthians 1:10? However as we can see the passage I quoted above, the problem is that people would rather have "itching ears" and have manmade doctrines instead of follow the truth. That unfortunately is the condition of the denominational world today. Unity is not on the basis of diversity, for that is not true unity at all as we know. Unity is thus possible if those who call themselves followers of Jesus are willing to do what it takes and follow the Word of God alone. Only in that sense, can the church of Christ be one

I think that such a narrow--and that by no means implies uninformed; please do not read it that way--understanding of the role of Scripture denies the presence of the Holy Spirit in the modern Church. It is the Church that has, from the earliest days of her existence, interpreted Scripture and preached sound doctrine. Though, as a result of there being one universal truth, there will inevitably be those who fall into error (even within the Church, for man is far from perfect), through the guidance of the Spirit in the Church we may be assured of adhering to truth. I would not view Tradition as an addition to the faith; I would view denying that the Church established by Christ can be guided by Scripture in its present deliberations as taking away from the faith.

In support of the authority of the Church to decide and preach sound doctrine I would refer to the following words of Christ:

Assuredly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18: 18)

As for the nature of the way in which the Church should determine doctrine, both in the days of the Fathers as well as in modern times, I refer to the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15, without which neither you nor I would have the Word. This, I feel, provides a basis for the traditional understanding of the role of the Church, as well as for the development of canon law. Of course the Church, composed of imperfect men, is bound to be imperfect insofar as it refuses to heed the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Church, however, is perfect insofar as it seeks and follows the guidance of the Holy Spirit. To deny that the Church can, as a collective whole, receive the guidance of the Spirit in our modern era places a limitation on the power/energies of God.

-Akolouthos

P.S. Halevi, I will respond to your post in the other thread. Forgive me, I seem to have gotten drawn into this discussion. This, coupled with the grad work I am currently undertaking, has occupied most of my time.

Regarding the unification of the Christian Church, Komnenos hit a spot with his observation that the ruling classes eventually created and enforced the leading Christian dogma. Though many Christians may believe that this type of thinking is heresy due to the assumed fact that the Nicean conferance only adhered to prevalent Christian doctrine established in the Bible. Eventually the Bible is ambiguous about the meanings of trinity and church. The ruling elites politicised Christianity and continue to do so when new issues are faced by the elite and flock.

Edited by Seko

Yes, I didn't read Buddhist Sutras. Koran was for me inadequate for globalisation but i don't understood a lot of things and maybe i'm wrong.

But must any of them be read?

Originally posted by Richard XIII My friend, the Bible must be read methaphorically.

So must the Koran and the core Buddhist Sutras.

Right?

Originally posted by Richard XIII Protestant propaganda. Btw I believe in God.

Hi Richard a statement of opinion means nothing as you know. The quotations of Akolouthos and me where from the Word of God that stesses unity. Why did you not state in what sense the church is one? At lease we know where authority is found. Here is a quote not from protestantism, catholism or orthodoxism, but the Word of God, which was written before all three, in 1 John 2:1-6. Here is the quote,

1 My little children, these things I write to you, so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. 3 Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him. 6 He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked.

As we can see, the Holy Spirit clearly moved the Apostle John to write that we come to "know"  God, Jesus, is because "we" keep His commandments, otherwise we are a liar and the "truth" is not in us. Notice the emphasis in the passage above is that we keep the Word which is the Truth to "know" God.

Edited by Cuauhtemoc

Originally posted by Akolouthos I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. (Eph. 4: 1-6) Saint Paul wrote these words to the Church at Ephesus, during his imprisonment in Rome (61-63 A.D.) They follow his plea for unity in Corinthians (ca. 55 A.D.): Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement. (I Cor. 1: 10) The words of Paul ring true today for millions of Christians around the world who long for the unity of the Apostolic faith.

Amen Akolouthos, unity is a worthy goal that Christianity should strive for as stressed in the passages you have quoted from the Word of God. However the only basis of "unity" must be based on the teachings of Jesus found in the New Testament, the Word of God. Jesus also like Paul addressed the issue of unity. Jesus, the Lord said that "unity" must be based and have as its foundation, in the Word of God! Thus Jesus is very specific about where unity is found. Note what the Saviour said in JOHN 17:17-21. Here is the passage,

Quote:   17 Sanctify them in your truth. Your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, even so I sent them into the world. 19 For their sakes I sanctify myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth. 20 Neither for these only do I pray, but for those also who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that you sent me.

As we can see, unity is possible but only if our beliefs come from the Word of God only. We must get rid of the manmade doctrines that have been added over the centuries. All who are willing to follow the Word of God and drop manmade ideas can be unified as Jesus said on His Word. The Holy Spirit guided the Apostle Paul to write that if the Word alone is preached as Jesus said, then one would have sound doctrine and the truth, please note the point in 2 Timothy 4:1-4. Here is a quote of the passage,

1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at* His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; 4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables

As we can see from the passage Akolouthos, Christians are to preach the Word, whether it is popular or not. The Word is used interchangably with "sound doctrine" and with the "truth". Thus anything NOT found in the Word of God is an addition that is not sound and not truth. Thus clearly "unity" is found when we all decide to follow the Word of God, and that obviously means very great changes and the elimination of many manmade doctrines. How else Akolouthos can we be of the "same mind" as stated by the Apostle Paul as he wrote in 1 Corinthians 1:10? However as we can see the passage I quoted above, the problem is that people would rather have "itching ears" and have manmade doctrines instead of follow the truth. That unfortunately is the condition of the denominational world today. Unity is not on the basis of diversity, for that is not true unity at all as we know. Unity is thus possible if those who call themselves followers of Jesus are willing to do what it takes and follow the Word of God alone. Only in that sense, can the church of Christ be one.

Edited by Cuauhtemoc

Originally posted by Komnenos The problem with the Nicene Creed is of course that it is not an expression of the one and pure doctrinal truth, inspired by whoever might have inspired it, but the result of very profane political schemings. It is an reflection of the power constellations in the higher clergy of the Church and in the Imperial administration in 325, and of the personal prejudices of Constantine I who asserted not a little pressure on the Council. And all other Councils that formulated similar fundamental doctrines decided for very similar reasons. To reject their findings would not be rejecting any divine truth but simply asserting one's minority right to a different interpretation. None of variants of the Christian belief that were dominant at one point in the history of Christianity can claim the monopoly of truth, but when they did could only do so as they had the power to enforce their dogmas over others.

Though political manipulation was a factor at almost all the Ecumenical Councils, I think it does a disservice to some of the brighest thinkers of the formative centuries of the Christian Church to say assert politics was the sole consideration, or even, for that matter, the most important. How, if that were so, would you account for the vindication of the icons? They were opposed violently by several emperors, the icon lovers were persecuted, yet still, after (if memory serves me correctly) the seventh Ecumenical council they were accepted.

-Akolouthos

I believe the Christian Church can be justly considered as one despite its institutional divisions. All the major Christian Churches still abide to the fundamental principles laid down by the Church Fathers. Those are to be found at the Nicene Creed, that christians all around the world utter at every mass.

The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed is the most widely accepted creed in the Christian Church. Since its original formulation it continues to be used in the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian, Roman Catholic, Anglican, and most Protestant churches.

Note that the modern version is in the plural like the Nicene version, although it is otherwise the Nicene-Constantinopolitan text, the Church changed it to first-person singular. In the west, this change was reversed, but Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Christians did not make this second change. Therefore;

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty

Maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,

the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father,

God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God,

begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.

Through him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven:

by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried.

On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures

he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,

And his kingdom will have no end

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life,

Who proceeds from the Father (and from the Son) 

With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified

He has spoken through the Prophets.

We believe in one holy Catholic and apostolic Church

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

We look for the resurrection of the dead,

and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Of course, when we look down in History and see the divisions, the bloodshed and the wars between different sects of Christianity, we can suspect of this unity in the real life. We can discuss about the legitimacy of the Papacy of the bishop of Rome, about the ordination of women, the use of contraceptives, the filioque clause and so on, but I believe the differences are essentially historical and political since the core beliefs are and must be the same. Even doctrinal differences can be overlapped if there's enough good will from each side and the recognition of diversity within unity.

Past generations have failed to make Christian Ecumenism an every day reality, but I hope and I am convinced that the future generations will succed in making the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church a more palpable institutional reality.