As a young man I looked for true love but I never found it until I found not only true but also the perfect love of Christ in His Orthodox church. Now I am old but but I can face the end of life in this world without fear because I know that God's promises are never broken.
Thus says the Lord, "Stand in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths of the Lord; and see what is the good way, and walk in it, and all of you will find purification for your souls". (Jeremiah 6:16)
You know, I actually think that it may be easier for low church evangelicals to come to orthodoxy than high church Protestants and Catholics. To the evangelicals, a simple cursory of early church history is enough to show we're out of line. However, with Anglicans, and even some Lutherans and Presbyterians, they have tried very hard to connect their movements to the past. Indeed, the reformers studied the fathers. Therefore, they have a much deeper history of explanations (excuses?) for the disconnect between Protestantism and the Fathers. Catholic are the hardest of all, since they are the literal competition with the Orthodox, namely, the other group claiming to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the creed. To these high church goers, they wonder what they need. I think evangelicalism, quickly becoming Protestantism main form, with its outright denial of history, actually is a truer picture of what Protestantism brings, and Evangelicals can actually diagnose their own sickness better. Just some thoughts.
It has driven me. I sought the liturgical worship that I read about in the psalms and old testament my whole life. Now I believe I know where I need to go! Christ is risen!
As early as the fourth century, as evidenced by the writings of The Blessed Augustine (not accepted as a Saint in the Orthodox Church because of his extremely negative views toward human sexuality), the Roman Church's theological perspective began to diverge from the original theological hermeneutic (interpretive keys) of the church, called "Typology". In Typology, theological understanding and interpretation (exegesis) is based upon seeing Old Testament events, persons, and passages as "types", or "anti-types", prefiguring events or types in the New Testament. For example, in Jonah's emergence from the whale's belly he can be perceived as a "type" of Christ rising from the dead. St. Paul compares Adam and Christ. Typology as a hermeneutic, and basis for biblical exegesis, is the most ancient, and continuous, biblical interpretation methodology of the church. It was established/practiced in the First Ecumenical Council (Acts of the Apostles) and continued by the Church Fathers, and by the Ecumenical and Local Councils, in the Orthodox Church through the present day. In the west, the theological hermeneutics of Typology, and the understanding of scripture and tradition flowing from it (exegesis) as embraced by the early Church Fathers and by the Seven Ecumenical Councils, was gradually supplanted in the Roman Church by the philosophical hermeneutics of Scholasticism. (Thomas Aquinas). The divergence of Rome from the continuous, living, unbroken, Holy Spirit inspired theological Tradition of the Church has led to Rome's misunderstanding of the nature of both church unity and authority in the church. The Church Fathers describe church unity as being spiritual, rather than a juridical (legalistic), reality. A reality which is grounded in the oneness in faith, love, spirit, and belief of The Church, the Body of Christ. The perspective of an autocratic church "leader", as many roman theologians describe the role of a pope (caesaropapism), is an innovation which gained adherents/momentum in the west as the roman mentality shifted more and more -- away from the "Typology" of the Fathers and Councils -- and toward scholastic philosophy. Officially in 1054, the Bishop/Pope of the Roman Patriarchate (and his missions) separated from the other four Bishops/Patriarchs of the Church: the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria (and their missions). By 1054, the mentalities of Eastern and Western Christianity, had clearly diverged. Spirituality, collegiality, a mystical focus, and local diversity predominated, as they always had, in Eastern Christianity. In Western Christianity, philosophy, legalism, and authoritarianism were more and more supplanting the ancient traditions of the church. (One interesting result/product of the new, developing roman mentality was the papal mandate circa 1200 that priests could no longer marry. It took until nearly 1500 before married clergy were "nearly" eliminated in the roman church). Married clergy are a 2000+ year unbroken tradition in the Church. Canons of Ecumenical Councils specify the rules/boundaries. As the Apostles said in Acts "It seemed good to us and to The Holy Spirit". "Us" and "Holy Spirit" are important, operative terms here. The Apostles acted together with inspiration from the Holy Spirit. No one Apostle was exercising authority over the rest. The collegial relationship of the church's bishops was expressed/established here....authority was shared. There was no autocrat. During the period of The Seven Ecumenical Councils, popes were rarely involved in the proceedings....and then usually from afar when they were. Most of the dogmas and doctrines of the church were developed by theologians and Church Fathers from the Eastern "Orthodox" Patriarchates. The "primacy" which Rome attempted to assert over Constantinople in 1054 is a concept that was not continuously or consistently embraced by the Church Fathers. It is an opinion expressed by a minority of clergy and theologians, almost exclusively in the west. The ecclesiastical interrelationship of the Orthodox Patriarchs, including all the additional Patriarchates that have been established throughout the world in the ensuing centuries, is continuous and uninterrupted since the first Pentecost when the Church was established. It continues the tradition started at the First Ecumenical Council (Acts). The diversity-in-unity of the Orthodox Church today is reflective of the life & experience: "The Living Tradition" of The Church since Pentecost. The Roman ecclesiastical body has deviated from the ecclesiastical interrelationships that existed among all Patriarchates in the early church. The Orthodox Church (The One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church) united in dogma, doctrine, and love through the Holy Spirit, expressing the unedited Tradition of the Church, is Body of Christ. Theological innovations (heresies) like papal primacy, the immaculate conception, papal infallibility are historically recent positions adopted by Rome. These innovations do not reflect 'what was always believed everywhere by all' (a paraphrase of the doctrine of catholicity as expressed and held by many Fathers of the Church). Throughout history, papal scandals and intrigue have been common. Multiple so-called "popes" have vied for the papal throne. Sometimes one was in Italy, one in France. Historically, St. Peter spent most of his time in Antioch and is recognized as Antioch's first Bishop. The preponderance of biblical scholars, and Church Fathers, interpret "the rock" upon whom the church is built as: Peter's confession of faith, the faith he expressed, when Jesus asked, "But who do you say I am?" in Matthew 16: 15, and Peter replies, "You are the Christ the Son of the living God," in Matthew 16: 16. So in Matthew 16: 18, when Jesus replies, "And I also say to you, you are Peter and on this rock [this rock of the faith you just enunciated] I will build My church." It is upon the faith that Peter just demonstrated that Jesus "will build [His] church." Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church. An ancient tradition held by the Orthodox Church is that: Whenever any believer confesses a church dogma, doctrine or teaching that reflects the Holy Faith of The Church, that 'has always been believed everywhere by all' ...that person speaks infallibly. Only to the extent that any layperson, clergyman, or bishop speaks from this vantage point of the Living Tradition of The Church, is he/she infallible.
Thank you for such a precise and attention to detail laden comment! Many of us in the west( I live in America) are oblivious to the origins of our common Faith in Christ our Savior and Lord! Crazy thing is, is that, I've been studying Roman Catholicism having become Anglican about 2 years ago and almost converted summer of 2018 but didn't then was blessed with a book at Christmas that attempted to coalesce the beliefs of the early church with that of Rome in our day. However, when I got tot he chapter on Baptism I found a bit of contradiction! Two chapters before I was relieved to find that most Catholics don't belief in Faith + Works Salvation but rather lean on Christ and His Finality Passion! Then a few chapters later there is a chapter on Baptism that eludes that in Roman Catholicism they believe that at Baptism there is Baptismal Regeneration that is once you are Baptized your sins are forgiven you up until that point so that if you wander off and die in your wandering you lose your salvation! Seems works oriented to me in that data~ Long story short, In my search for historical continuity I stumbled upon Orthodoxy and have been on a journey since then to learn more about the Faith purchasing The Orthodox Study Bible and The Orthodox Church by Killistos Ware(Timothy Ware) and have grown immensely in my knowledge of the Eastern church for once! I can say from my studies thus far that I have more in common with my Ancient Orthodox fam than Rome! Not sure if I'm ready to convert at the moment but am open to learning more and am open to converting! God Bless Those who are filled with The Spirit of The Living God! Amen! God Bless His Ekklesia both near and abroad!
The True church is like a hidden treasure standing quietly hidden in the world , yet people come quietly to it. They are sent and led to our Lord. Various ways the treasure is found ,as it should.
its because we don't set out to convert people and wash out their cultures like other unoriginal churches. all orthodox nations chose orthodoxy, they weren't forced upon it.
That is so true, Servant. There are conservatives and liberals in my parish, but they respect each other and none of them are radical like when I was a protestant.
How does that apply to Metropolitan Phillip and the Antiochian Orthodox priests who are ordained in this video? They are perfectly reverent in their worship.
It looks almost identical; the most important differences are not the most obvious ones. Go to Wikipedia and look up "Eastern Orthodox Roman Catholic Differences"
Love the way you used the flag as an example dear brother, good example! How many churches does not have flags in their buildings, of course that does not mean they worship them. Same with the icons, not there for worship but for a purpose. God bless beloved brothers!
As someone who's considered Orthodoxy I find it interesting these men are not from ethnic groups with significant Orthodox backgrounds, they are British, German, and Scandinavian Americans. I myself am an American whose ancestry is not from significantly Orthodox ethnic groups (Dutch, Filipino). It's interesting he mentions people being caught up in their "ethnic ghettos". It seems here in America there is much division based on race. Perhaps more so now than when this video was made.
+James Vander Vegt here is an excellent book in question / answer format for western inquirers into Eastern Orthodoxy. it is filled with references to the Scriptures. books.google (*dot*) com/books?id=mcG8AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover i was formerly protestant for 28+ years before learning of Eastern Orthodoxy. time permitting, please also see the 3 'christianity timeline' images i have posted on the below website. regards, theOrthodoxFaith (*dot*) org
+James Vander Vegt i am actually Asian myself (born in India) living in the US (Philadelphia) and i attend a Russian Orthodox parish. i also visit Georgian, Greek, and American parishes and i'm warmly recieved by all. your ethnicity does not matter in anyway. even if you feel uncomfortable (as i did), keep attending for a few weeks and soon you will get over it. you may feel a bit self-conscious initially but after a few visits you will easily get over it. just be aware that the Orthodox Church practices closed communion - meaning only Orthodox Christians may take the Eucharist (Holy Communion). i have to wait until i become Orthodox (via baptism in my case) before i may partake of the Eucharist. please see the below article about Eastern Orthodoxy around the world, including Philippines, Mongolia, Pakistan, Thailand, Cambodia, Cote d’Ivoire, Kenya, and my own country India: pravmir (*dot*) com/apostles-twenty-first-century/
+Godly Mathew All right that is interesting considering I am Asian (Filipino and Chinese) on my mother's side. Do you know any Dutch Orthodox Christians considering I am Dutch on my father's side?
James 2:24, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” We could toss scriptures back and forth all day, but it really wouldn’t get us anywhere. And that’s what the article I suggested you read is all about. Without a shared context, two people can interpret the Bible to mean anything they please-which is one reason why we desperately need the Church. Without its God-given authority, one can easily end up where Joseph Smith did-inventing a new religion entirely.
Umm, icons aren't graven, they are painted (or "written" in orthodoxspeak :)) Dictionary definition of graven: carved; sculptured: a graven idol. Paint is not mentioned anywhere in the 10 commandments
Also, do not think for a moment that I doubt either the devotion to Christ, or the salvation, of William Tyndale and the many other Christians from traditions outside Orthodoxy who have been, and continue to be, martyred for their faith. We all love and worship the same Lord-that’s not in question. My only point, honestly, is that the Church is the reason we have the Bible, and not the other way around.
icons are the reason why their faith is so strong, the orthodox church is also more a cultural and ethnical church similar to juduasm instead just a religion. Icons are an important expression of culture and art. you dont understand and wont never understand it.
whether they called it that or not; the powers it claimed and the theology of the unique office that Peter was given by Christ have always been implicit in the actions of the See. The first Seven Councils never denied what Rome was teaching about itself, and quite often the Patriarchs of Constantinople even wholly submitted to the teaching by not resisting it and continuing to refer to the Patriarch of Rome as "the Sacred Head of the Church," and so on.
Orthodoxy in America is a joke. Church boards are dominated by Masons, Rotarians, etc. who have no clue about Orthodoxy. Arrogant formally educated snobs are church presidents.
for Orthodoxy in America to take root, it must seek fidelity to *Holy Tradition*, the pure undefiled faith of the Fathers, and not attempt to define itself according to contemporary innovations and heterodoxy. the root of all innovations and heresy is human pride. we must resist the temptation to fit in with the papists, protestants, and other false sects. it is good that converts are coming to Orthodoxy, but we must preserve Orthodoxy in all its fullness and not acquiesce to modifying the faith to suit 'western tastes'.
Godly Mathew What are the differences between the Orthodox Church of America and the Greek Orthodox Church? Seems like the Greek Orthodox Church has a more full communion with the original Orthodox Church?
JOHN WESLEY AND EASTERN ORTHODOXY: Influences, Convergences, and Differences Randy L. Maddox: "despite [Wesley's] sympathies with early Greek theologians, Wesley offered generally negative judgements concerning contemporary Eastern Orthodox life and thought-in keeping with most Western Protestantism, though perhaps less nuanced than some Anglicans of his day."
It's a tough thing to make sense of, the schism between East and West. The Nestorians and Monophysites are pretty easy to understand (and heal) comparatively, but East and West is extremely complicated. I was raised Protestant, until I awoke to the ancient and true Church, first in the context of Roman Catholicism, and then in the context of both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. I am in the process of conversion to the Roman Catholic Church. The thing is, Rome didn't technically split from..
And a little finisher for both of us dear brother :P Whilst the bible is certainly old, there is no evidence that the apostles ever preached the teachings in it. The books included in the bible etc. Or hold on, the church may have the answer, if we let it speak for itself in history and according to the truth we both hold unto. Plenty of love dear brother
Hm. One thing in common these early fellows had, was a longing to return to the Orthodox Faith. This is why Huss was burned, for instance. Not trying to create a new form of Christianity, but trying to reach back to what had been lost when the Roman pope created the Schism.
They don't know they are wrong. They think they are right. You and I know that the Orthodox faith is the One True Faith, but that doesn't make them beyond God's mercy; they think (wrongly) that what the are doing is right. They wouldn't do it otherwise. God knows their hearts. You and I do not, unless you happen to be a clairvoyant elder and you're not telling me.
There was a time when God communicated directly with His chosen people, the Jews. Some of what He said included instructions on who would be set apart for a priesthood, what they should wear, and a great many things they should do. Because God told them to do it, they did it. I notice that these priests are not Jewish, yet the way they look and the things they do are far from ordinary. Did God establish a particular way for them to be chosen, set apart, act, how to dress what to do, etc.? When?
And please let´s be honest, how many times did not the apostles break bread, fast and even have council with elders & priests. All is recorded in scripture, but modern churches are often brushing away that part so that the church in book of acts are a church of that time, not of our time. The apostles were the closest ones to the Lord, but instead of following their example modern churches want to exclude them.
Well, that’s only if you’re reading Martin Luther’s German translation of the New Testament, in which he added “alone” to St. Paul’s words. Actually, if you’re at all interested in understanding the Orthodox approach to scripture, it’s summed up much more concisely, comprehensively, and elegantly than I could likely manage in an excellent article called, “How the Church Reads the Church,” on the blog, “Glory to God for All Things.” Google that, and it’ll be the first result you see. Blessings!
What the apostles considered to be their fellow-laborers (like Titus and Timothy) were later (after their deaths) considered to be bishops. The writings of Ignatius of Antioch only came about in A.D. 107. Nevertheless, if he believed this teaching from the beginning of his work (c. A.D. 69), this might fit the Apostle John's critique of the "antichrists" who love "the preeminence among them" and are the "conquerors of the people" (i.e. Nicolaitans, followers of Balaam), who put themselves in the place of God (2 Thess. 2:3-4).
Chief, what I am saying is that there was no single religion called Gnosticism, and so, there was no one school to support it, either in Alexandria, Athens, Andalusia. To say there was is a misleading over-simplification. SO, there were no "these people" out there altering these or other texts. The one exception may be Marcion, a wealthy Christian who financed his own altered version of the Scriptures to support notions very similar to much of modern Protestantism.
I would absolutely brother, but i assume that they believed what they wrote cause their wonderful church provided me with that info, not that i actually assume it out of heaven
That's absurd. Have you ever bothered to go to an Orthodox service and ask the worshipers themselves what it is they think they're doing, or are you content to judge and condemn at a distance without hearing it from the horse's mouth?
Jesus therefore established that church to have his perfect body be presented to a world where it does not fit in. That´s why people need to hear a funny, creative and soooo modern sermons, so that the church won´t become booring. With other words culture>church and not church>culture
Priests (even bishops) are deposed if evidence is beyond reasonable doubt. The O.C. does not abide by any statute of limitations. If there is a court trial, they are suspended for the duration. If convicted, they are deposed. If the former priest is non-celibant, he is deposed to the rank of layman. If he was a hieromonk (priestmonk), he is deposed to the rank of monk and restricted to a monastery where he must carry out his penance. In all cases, they are never protected from legal process.
Vachief, the missing verses (yes, there are quite a few!) trace back to the time and center of the Arian rebellion against the Orthodox Church. Arius, of course, claimed that Christ is a special creation and not God Incarnate. Interestingly, the 3,000+ variations in the Alexandrian papyrii all serve to support his notions. The Orthodox Church does NOT recognise that textform, but draws its NT authorities from the Byzantine (think, Textus Receptus).
actually it is. this is a tradition which has been handed down to Orthodox. it is supposed to be a distinguishing feature of a man and someone who isn't a pagan. Go take a look at monastics and you will see that they all have beards.
How do you know they didn't use anything as a tool of worship? Cause it's not in the Bible? That doesn't mean they didn't, it just means you aren't willing to read other early Church documents to expand your mind and learn more about the early Church. I notice that you have ignored several times the fact that both the Hebrews and early Christians used images in their worship. Could it be you don't have a good answer to that fact? Finally, look at the 3rd definition of grave, it is to engrave.
body who happens to know what the word really means. I have tried to explain basic principles about Bible (or any text) translation, but you don't seem to grasp that all other languages are not necessarily clever codes for English. E.g., "elohim" in Hebrew means, literally, "high and lifted up one(s)." It is used in Gen. 1 for God, in Job 1 for the angels, and in the Psalms for the people of God, and for kings and judges. Obviously, a translator has is work cut out for him when confronting this
Except that the in the bible, we see people follow the apostles to break bread and pray "The prayers" (Acts 2:42) togheter, please check the reference up so you don´t take my word for granted, but the word of God. Or when we read in the word of God (1 Timothy 4:13-16) that there was a council of elders. 1 Corinthians 11:23-32 maybe can help you aswell dear brother.
Your comment is irrelevant to what I was trying to portrait through mine. I believe that Holy Tradition is the source of the Bible so therefore the Church became first before New Testament and the CHURCH is the one that preserve the FAITH unchanged and interprets the Bible NOT Sola Scriptura ~ The way of perdition in time ~ (as I call it :-) ) like the PROTESTANTS do.
but you managed not to notice it. I told you that I do not endorse the Alexandrian textform, but you keep telling me why you don't like it. If you want to look more closely at what Gnosticism actually looks like today, I will give you a hint. The main plan is that the members have knowledge only members are given, that there is some secret about who Jesus is outside of what the Church has always taught, and that there are special rules to show one is a member. In all these ways, you are Gnostic.
The Early Church was BOTH culturally Greek and culturally Semitic. Galatians and Hebrews were written to smooth out he details about what it means to be a Christian, and how being in Jesus Christ makes Greekness and Hebrewness irrelevant. The Orthodox Church incorporates MANY languages and cultures, and it always has. If I may be so bold as to speculate, it would appear that you've made a gross oversimplification in order to justify your inability to ask new questions.
The difference is only in the the hymns and iconography. The service is the same everywhere. The theology is the same. And don't start about the icons, please. If you want, I'm sure there are plenty Orthodox on youtube, who will gladly discuss this with you, but not me. I'm a lazy student.
So what? You think the Protestants didn't do worse in Geneva and elsewhere? No, no Christian believer or group is innocent. Nobody has clean hands; all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
And when you realise that we dont worship icons nor Mary the blessed virgin, please come to the church of Christ to see how beautiful we combine the scripture into reality, as was the purpose of the church. When you realise that evangelicalism cant provide information to you why there were elders, priests and liturgical prayers in the new testament, and why they can´t give proof that their church is the one of Christ, then please pay a visit to our beloved home of Christ :)
Do you know anything about the early church? How do you think the early church worshipped? Didn't the Apostles gather to pray and worship? You seriously need to do research, instead of making hollow remarks.
Yes, there were bishops in the early church. No one who believes Scripture disputes this. But when the wolves crept in, "ARCH" rule, began to be tacked on to bishop, EPISKOPOS became ARKHI-EPISKOPOS; that which the Lord Himself commanded not to do. Matt.20:25,26. But Jesus called them to and said. " You know that the rulers (ARKHONTES) of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who exercise authority over them. "Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your sevant."
You say you are a student of Church history, yet all you come up with from your studies is a load of unfounded accusations against people and events it doesn't even know. "Gnosticism" is a modern label for a group of beliefs which applied used Christian language to teach pre-Christian philosophical views. In the language of the time, "gnostic" simply meant "one having knowledge." So, Clement of Alexandria used that word in its proper context of his day, not as a 20th c. theology teacher.
Chief, no name calling here.. I was plain that I do not choose to believe you are such as your arguments present you. I have begged you to give your sources. Why? Because they are so ridiculously skewed that they are left with no recognisable basis in historical fact. Your reply here is a perfect example. You, or your sources, make up a category, call it "Gnostic," and populate it with the names of people you apparently have never read. I tried to explain to you the origin of the word "gnostic,"
hope you are not that far into that trip. I have known folks that were. They typically might also have gone for snake juggling contests and Jesus-only baptism, but that is another story for another day. From what I have been able to gather, you belong to a fairly small Baptist or Brethren group which is fairly well convinced that everybody else is in damnable error, and so you see no need to show an ounce of respect for anyone who would hold a different view than your own. If you want to stay
i am roman catholic, and i have respect for the Orthodox Churches. But there is disunity. That is a sad fact of history. I once knelt down in a public parking lot and asked a Greek Orthodox Priest to give me his blessing, because i know he is a real priest, as much as my roman catholic parish priest. I like the way Pope John Paul said it. The western Church and the eastern Church are two lungs of the One True Holy Apostollic Church. I dont appreciate an Orthodox telling me that the Catholic Church is false.
The problem with the 'lung theory' is that Orthodoxy and Roman-catholicism are separated because of doctrinal differences (which were increased since 1054) and not just ecclesiastical diplomacy. Thus, if we accept the Church as the Body of Christ how could be possible for the same Body to consist by two members not sharing the same faith neither communion to each other? Is Christ divided? Let it not be so! That's why the Orthodox say that Roman-catholics are wrong. We simply can not be both right. That is not a matter of hatred toward Roman-catholics, but consistency with our faith.
i think the doctrinal differences could be overcome. i think the differences are more a matter of the trajectory of history, beginning with the division of the empire by Constantine, and the constant interference of the Emperors, and the deference of the Church to the State.
It is true that the schism had also a political background and it was not a sudden event that took place in 1054. The schism of 1054 was only the final result of a long process that began mainly after the collapse of the western part of the Roman Empire (476 AD). After that Popes had a more and more independent (from Constantinople) role in both ecclesiastical and political issues (their involvement to politics was inevitable up to an extend since Church was the only form of organised governmece after the collapse of roman west). However the political fact that accelerated the separation between East and West was the conquer of Rome by the German tribe of Franks at the early 11th century and the consequest occupation of the See of Rome by Frankish Popes. Franks due to their rivalry with the Eastern Roman Empire not only began to have claims on the Roman legacy as a whole (they named their state as 'Holy Roman Empire of German Nation') but they also used Papacy in order to prevent the influence of the Eastern Empire to its former western provices (mainly Italy and western Balkans). How did they used Papacy? They officialy adopted the controversial doctine of filioque (contrary to the Canons of 2nd and 3rd Ecumanical Councils) so as to cut the ecclesiastical "bridges" between East and West. The official schism of 1054 was then only a matter of time. Finally the 4th crucade of 1204 and the sacking of Constantinople destroyed any chance of reconciliation.
These men were ordained too rapidly and without any formation; and made deacons upon Chrismation (not even lector and hypodeacon for a time; what about seminary?). Why would Metro Philippos do this given his record for discretion? Impose not thy hands lightly upon any man. Enthusiasm is good, but too much of a good thing here, I think. Glory to Christ in any case.
You, my friend, have no idea what are you are talking about. Read Corithians, read epistle to Dignetus, and all the apostolic fathers. Beard or no beard - it is a custom. In Serbia, priests have beards, but it is not an obligation. It is not crucial. Liturgy is, unity of the Church is, mission of the Church is. Come and see - said the Lord. He mentioned no beards, just love and eucharist. May God grant all the orthodox His mercy and His peace.
lol, you think it is a false religion because some people have long titles and fancy rituals? You don't have communion in your church or baptism? Why do you partake in those rituals? I was not aware having a long title was named in the Bible as an indication of a false religion. It must be in the same book that says we should wear cargo shorts and t-shirts to our rock band worship service.
Let's be clear, there is a war and it is just plain ignorance for anyone to state that Islam is a peaceful religion. Read history. This was against the infidels has been going on since the birth of Islam.Islam does not pray to the same God. They state that Christ was only a prophet and the Holy Trinity is a heretical teaching. Please pray, support and be heard, in any way, for these bishops and the plight of the remaining Orthodox under Islamic control in that region.
I will be attending my first Orthodox service this Sunday. Exited and nervous at the same time. I truly believe Orthodoxy is the true church established by Jesus.
These are protestants who became Orthodox because they studied church history and found to their surprise that the historic church of Christianity was the Orthodox Church. The Catholics were the original protestants leaving the church in the great schism of 1054 and the protestants came later splitting off from the Catholics. My Father is a former Protestant and my Mother a former Catholic. They returned to the Orthodox Church. To my brothers and sisters in Christ I say come home. The church did not die. It has always been here.
+Dirk Moffatt I am Protestant and looking into Orthodoxy as I researched church history and it led me to them......my husband was ironically raised Russian Orthodox----me no religion but when we met a 26 ---ended up at Protestant churches all this time ........
+DebbieJo Lederer i was formerly protestant (for 28+ years) and now a catechumen (someone preparing for baptism) in the Eastern Orthodox Church. here is an excellent book for protestants to read. it is in question / answer format and has plenty of scripture references. *Dance, O Isaiah* books.google (*dot*) com/books?id=mcG8AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover you can click the gear icon and download it as a pdf for local viewing. if you prefer audio, this is a very good site for protestants to learn about Orthodoxy. *Our Life in Christ* ourLifeInChrist (*dot*) com there are various topics on the right hand side you can download the audio for. time permitting, please also visit my site below regards, theOrthodoxFaith (*dot*) org.
+Godly Mathew Do they believe that other Christians aren't saved? In Protestant churchs as long as you are saved you can take communion -----What I am asking is If you are an Orthodox are you taught to dislike the other denominations ----as I don't think i could ---I kinda went through that as a Seventh Day Adventist-----I think we need to love everyone no matter which way they worship but yes encourage them the way you believe to be the best way.........(as long as that agrees with the bible)
The Orthodox Church is the true church! The church should never had been "modernised" to suit mankind! It is Gods house! Unchanged forever! All Christian's should return to the Orthodox Church and be saved! Amen! America will become Orthodox in the end! Jesus is our lord and father in heaven!
No it isn't. The Roman Catholic Church is the one true church! My ancestors fled Albania to Italy in the 15th Century after Constantinople fell to the Turks. Without the RCC, Christianity would have been only a footnote in history. If the Orthodox Church is the true church, then why did God let its capital fall to the infidel Turks?
I had emergency Cancer surgery on my back October 28th, and.my ex wife had a stroke 3 days before that. I'also been diagnosed with multiple myeloma. A pay dispute with my company has left me with nothing for Christmas. Please pray for us. Ray anxious Kathy.
The Virgin Mary in the Orthodox Church, is the most important Saint. The only women allowed in the altar. It might seem like the Orthodox Church is only secluded to Men. Tis not true, there are many important poisition a for women in the Orthodox Church, many.
Here I am 44 years later on the road home. It was under the preaching of Jack Sparks in the streets of Berkeley in 1971 that I was called into the ministry. I followed the comings and goings of Jack and the brothers of the Yellow Deli, NCAO, EOC and now St. Athanasius Church and University. What a mighty legacy these brothers have left and paths clear enough that others will follow. Thanks to Father Braun I have my own copy of the Orthodox Bible He and Fr. Jack worked on. I am so blessed to have stumbled onto this document. In Berkeley I lived on the roof of God's Love and passed out the "Right On" newspaper. Now that same love continues to lead me and tonight I am here praising Jesus with all my heart.
Bob Bonnell Great comment brother. Have some great links to send you relating to that time if you'd like to receive them, videos. Just let me know an email. The Lord be with you.
@Bob Bonnell I remember hearing Peter Gillquist, Gordon Walker and Ray Nethery--who didn't join the rest in their journey to Orthodoxy--at Grace Haven Farm in Mansfield, OH in ... was it 1971 or 72? Yikes! So long ago but my life and faith were impacted by them as a teenager. Although I am not Orthodox and as an older adult embraced the Reformed tradition and world view, I greatly admire these men. I recently read Fr. Peter Gillquist's book _Becoming Orthodox_ which I highly recommend to anyone who wants to learn of their pilgrimage to Orthodoxy. Blessings, brother
The Orthodox Church doesn't just believe in the bible, but a multitude of scriptures. The bible isn't everything, just a compilation of important events
Amen! But who's works? The answer is in Ephesians 2:10: "...good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them". Why? Because, verse 9: "Not of works, lest any man should boast". Also Titus 3:5-7: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; 6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; 7 That being justified by his grace..."
Ernest E.W. Herman The Orthodox understanding of salvation doesn't put works as the only presupposition of salvation. The salvation comes through the Grace and the mercy of God. We just say that in the question of what shows the will of a human to be saved the answer is not faith alone
GreekPontus I might not understand exactly the way that you put it. But since we talk about the works which God requires us to do in order to be saved then that is in John 6:29: "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." Or this one: John 5:24: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."
Ernest E.W. Herman Indeed you seem not to understand my friend. The salvation is almost equal with the "theosis", the connection between a human and God. Of course we can't be united with the divine nature of God, but it can happen through His Grace (the uncreated energy of God for our salvation) John 1:17. This unity can't be achieved without God’s help (Ephesians 2:8). What God does (the action of His divine Grace) is immeasurably greater than what man does (his will, which is expressed through the faith and the works) Hebrews 4:16, Ephesians 4:7, 2 Corinthians 12:9. According to the Orthodox understanding the protestants emphasize more in one factor of the human will (the faith), instead of the action of God (which is the most important). I hope I helped you understand our perspective
GreekPontus Thanks for being willing to educate me, hope you’ll continue to do so. First, I want to inform you that I do NOT care of the Protestants’ views. What authority do they have before God? John 1:11-13 tells us that those who believe in Christ God “to them gave He power to become the sons of God”, not Protestants. Just forget them. God tells us also that He will judge us “by that man whom he hath ordained”, namely Jesus - not by the Protestants (Acts 17:31). Moreover, Jesus tells us explicitly in John 12:48 that “the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day”, not the Protestants’ word. Now I have several questions in regard of your very deep thoughts but today, with your very permission, I’ll address you just this one: You said “the connection between a human and God” My question: Since God is “purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity” (Hab. 1:13), how can Him be connected so intimately with the man who is dead, “dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephes. 2:1)? Since the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), how can he be connected with the living God?
The Orthodox Church is the true church.
+Spudskie the ortho church is a carbon copy of papal catholic sun worship.
+rusda2
we worship Christ our God. _He_ is our sun and light.
_'For the Lord God is a sun'_ - Psalm 84_11
_'God is light'_ - 1 John 1_5
Spudskie Ha nice response!
Catholics Worship Jesus the Son not the Sun in the sky. Throw your Chick comic Books away
The true church is the spiritual church and unity between Christians to Christ. It is NOT A PHYSICAL CHURCH. Read 1 Peter 2:1-10
I was a Protestant for years ... now I’m the path to become an orthodox. May the Lord be merciful with my soul.
Welcome Home. May the prayers of the most Holy Theotokos be with you, always.
Gretchen Thunberg Thank u sister. It is really important read a blessed message like this. God bless u.
As a young man I looked for true love but I never found it until I found not only true but also the perfect love of Christ in His Orthodox church. Now I am old but but I can face the end of life in this world without fear because I know that God's promises are never broken.
All Christian denominations must come back to Orthodoxy.
So.true .
Amen. Unfortunately the heretics can't see the difference between Orthodoxy and them. They think choosing your sect is a matter of taste...
@@lupinthe4th400 100%
Nah
@Incognito777 only if they drop the vatican 1 and 2, if they don't then no worries, we have nova roma
ortodox is my church, the old religion of apostles, GOD bless every one. we are humble.
+smart kid anyone calling HIMSELF humble is hardly such.
+rusda2
learn to read.
he did not call _himself_ humble.
he referred to the Orthodox Church as humble.
However, I have brought many Protestants to the Church, and now they are Orthodox.
I am catholic
shame on you
@@eleftheriosiliopoulos8796 What is there to shame about bringing people to the church Jesus Christ himself started?
From a Roman Catholic brother, God bless you, and the peace of Christ be with you!
"Come home America!" (21:14) Stirring words from a great servant of God, Metropolitan Philip. Even so, Come LORD Jesus!"
Thus says the Lord, "Stand in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths of the Lord; and see what is the good way, and walk in it, and all of you will find purification for your souls". (Jeremiah 6:16)
Yes, I was one of them. That was 33 years ago.
Wow, that's powerful.
You know, I actually think that it may be easier for low church evangelicals to come to orthodoxy than high church Protestants and Catholics. To the evangelicals, a simple cursory of early church history is enough to show we're out of line. However, with Anglicans, and even some Lutherans and Presbyterians, they have tried very hard to connect their movements to the past. Indeed, the reformers studied the fathers. Therefore, they have a much deeper history of explanations (excuses?) for the disconnect between Protestantism and the Fathers. Catholic are the hardest of all, since they are the literal competition with the Orthodox, namely, the other group claiming to be the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of the creed. To these high church goers, they wonder what they need. I think evangelicalism, quickly becoming Protestantism main form, with its outright denial of history, actually is a truer picture of what Protestantism brings, and Evangelicals can actually diagnose their own sickness better. Just some thoughts.
It has driven me. I sought the liturgical worship that I read about in the psalms and old testament my whole life. Now I believe I know where I need to go! Christ is risen!
Evangelicals, mainstream Protestants, Orthodox, are all under the control of Rome.
+David Star500 You need to ask yourself: Why is the Apocalypse of St. John never read in any liturgical cycle of any Chalcedonian Orthodox Church?
***** The name that you use tells me that you are not a Christian. Go and change your user name, and we will talk.
David Star500 Catholics refer to the Eastern Orthodox as the first church.
This puts me in tears of joy and these protestants are saved !!
God bless Metropolitan Philip.
As early as the fourth century, as evidenced by the writings of The Blessed Augustine (not accepted as a Saint in the Orthodox Church because of his extremely negative views toward human sexuality), the Roman Church's theological perspective began to diverge from the original theological hermeneutic (interpretive keys) of the church, called "Typology".
In Typology, theological understanding and interpretation (exegesis) is based upon seeing Old Testament events, persons, and passages as "types", or "anti-types", prefiguring events or types in the New Testament.
For example, in Jonah's emergence from the whale's belly he can be perceived as a "type" of Christ rising from the dead. St. Paul compares Adam and Christ.
Typology as a hermeneutic, and basis for biblical exegesis, is the most ancient, and continuous, biblical interpretation methodology of the church. It was established/practiced in the First Ecumenical Council (Acts of the Apostles) and continued by the Church Fathers, and by the Ecumenical and Local Councils, in the Orthodox Church through the present day.
In the west, the theological hermeneutics of Typology, and the understanding of scripture and tradition flowing from it (exegesis) as embraced by the early Church Fathers and by the Seven Ecumenical Councils, was gradually supplanted in the Roman Church by the philosophical hermeneutics of Scholasticism. (Thomas Aquinas).
The divergence of Rome from the continuous, living, unbroken, Holy Spirit inspired theological Tradition of the Church has led to Rome's misunderstanding of the nature of both church unity and authority in the church.
The Church Fathers describe church unity as being spiritual, rather than a juridical (legalistic), reality. A reality which is grounded in the oneness in faith, love, spirit, and belief of The Church, the Body of Christ.
The perspective of an autocratic church "leader", as many roman theologians describe the role of a pope (caesaropapism), is an innovation which gained adherents/momentum in the west as the roman mentality shifted more and more -- away from the "Typology" of the Fathers and Councils -- and toward scholastic philosophy.
Officially in 1054, the Bishop/Pope of the Roman Patriarchate (and his missions) separated from the other four Bishops/Patriarchs of the Church: the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria (and their missions).
By 1054, the mentalities of Eastern and Western Christianity, had clearly diverged. Spirituality, collegiality, a mystical focus, and local diversity predominated, as they always had, in Eastern Christianity. In Western Christianity, philosophy, legalism, and authoritarianism were more and more supplanting the ancient traditions of the church.
(One interesting result/product of the new, developing roman mentality was the papal mandate circa 1200 that priests could no longer marry. It took until nearly 1500 before married clergy were "nearly" eliminated in the roman church).
Married clergy are a 2000+ year unbroken tradition in the Church. Canons of Ecumenical Councils specify the rules/boundaries.
As the Apostles said in Acts "It seemed good to us and to The Holy Spirit". "Us" and "Holy Spirit" are important, operative terms here. The Apostles acted together with inspiration from the Holy Spirit. No one Apostle was exercising authority over the rest. The collegial relationship of the church's bishops was expressed/established here....authority was shared. There was no autocrat.
During the period of The Seven Ecumenical Councils, popes were rarely involved in the proceedings....and then usually from afar when they were. Most of the dogmas and doctrines of the church were developed by theologians and Church Fathers from the Eastern "Orthodox" Patriarchates.
The "primacy" which Rome attempted to assert over Constantinople in 1054 is a concept that was not continuously or consistently embraced by the Church Fathers. It is an opinion expressed by a minority of clergy and theologians, almost exclusively in the west.
The ecclesiastical interrelationship of the Orthodox Patriarchs, including all the additional Patriarchates that have been established throughout the world in the ensuing centuries, is continuous and uninterrupted since the first Pentecost when the Church was established. It continues the tradition started at the First Ecumenical Council (Acts).
The diversity-in-unity of the Orthodox Church today is reflective of the life & experience: "The Living Tradition" of The Church since Pentecost. The Roman ecclesiastical body has deviated from the ecclesiastical interrelationships that existed among all Patriarchates in the early church.
The Orthodox Church (The One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church) united in dogma, doctrine, and love through the Holy Spirit, expressing the unedited Tradition of the Church, is Body of Christ.
Theological innovations (heresies) like papal primacy, the immaculate conception, papal infallibility are historically recent positions adopted by Rome. These innovations do not reflect 'what was always believed everywhere by all' (a paraphrase of the doctrine of catholicity as expressed and held by many Fathers of the Church).
Throughout history, papal scandals and intrigue have been common. Multiple so-called "popes" have vied for the papal throne. Sometimes one was in Italy, one in France.
Historically, St. Peter spent most of his time in Antioch and is recognized as Antioch's first Bishop. The preponderance of biblical scholars, and Church Fathers, interpret "the rock" upon whom the church is built as:
Peter's confession of faith, the faith he expressed, when Jesus asked, "But who do you say I am?" in Matthew 16: 15, and Peter replies, "You are the Christ the Son of the living God," in Matthew 16: 16. So in Matthew 16: 18, when Jesus replies, "And I also say to you, you are Peter and on this rock [this rock of the faith you just enunciated] I will build My church." It is upon the faith that Peter just demonstrated that Jesus "will build [His] church."
Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church.
An ancient tradition held by the Orthodox Church is that: Whenever any believer confesses a church dogma, doctrine or teaching that reflects the Holy Faith of The Church, that 'has always been believed everywhere by all' ...that person speaks infallibly.
Only to the extent that any layperson, clergyman, or bishop speaks from this vantage point of the Living Tradition of The Church, is he/she infallible.
Thank you for such a precise and attention to detail laden comment! Many of us in the west( I live in America) are oblivious to the origins of our common Faith in Christ our Savior and Lord! Crazy thing is, is that, I've been studying Roman Catholicism having become Anglican about 2 years ago and almost converted summer of 2018 but didn't then was blessed with a book at Christmas that attempted to coalesce the beliefs of the early church with that of Rome in our day. However, when I got tot he chapter on Baptism I found a bit of contradiction! Two chapters before I was relieved to find that most Catholics don't belief in Faith + Works Salvation but rather lean on Christ and His Finality Passion! Then a few chapters later there is a chapter on Baptism that eludes that in Roman Catholicism they believe that at Baptism there is Baptismal Regeneration that is once you are Baptized your sins are forgiven you up until that point so that if you wander off and die in your wandering you lose your salvation! Seems works oriented to me in that data~
Long story short, In my search for historical continuity I stumbled upon Orthodoxy and have been on a journey since then to learn more about the Faith purchasing The Orthodox Study Bible and The Orthodox Church by Killistos Ware(Timothy Ware) and have grown immensely in my knowledge of the Eastern church for once!
I can say from my studies thus far that I have more in common with my Ancient Orthodox fam than Rome!
Not sure if I'm ready to convert at the moment but am open to learning more and am open to converting!
God Bless Those who are filled with The Spirit of The Living God! Amen!
God Bless His Ekklesia both near and abroad!
GOD'S PLANS ARE BEAUTIFUL ♥
There’s a growing Orthodox movement in Jamaica of all places. Praise be to god
The True church is like a hidden treasure standing quietly hidden in the world , yet people come quietly to it. They are sent and led to our Lord. Various ways the treasure is found ,as it should.
its because we don't set out to convert people and wash out their cultures like other unoriginal churches. all orthodox nations chose orthodoxy, they weren't forced upon it.
Please pray for me. I know the Lord has led me to research Orthodoxy. Thank you
That is so true, Servant. There are conservatives and liberals in my parish, but they respect each other and none of them are radical like when I was a protestant.
Great respect to you brother, not often there can be a peaceful discussion through youtube as we´ve had, thanks a lot and may God bless you for that!
And praise God that he blessed me and many others with this lovely priest, whom you according to your interpretation calls pharisee...
How does that apply to Metropolitan Phillip and the Antiochian Orthodox priests who are ordained in this video? They are perfectly reverent in their worship.
God Bless the American Evangelical Orthodox Church Gospode Pomiluj, Gospode Pomiluj
Matthew and Mark were not written in Greek originally, but we only have Greek versions of those manuscripts today.
It looks almost identical; the most important differences are not the most obvious ones. Go to Wikipedia and look up "Eastern Orthodox Roman Catholic Differences"
GOOD FOR YOU
Love the way you used the flag as an example dear brother, good example!
How many churches does not have flags in their buildings, of course that does not mean they worship them. Same with the icons, not there for worship but for a purpose. God bless beloved brothers!
As someone who's considered Orthodoxy I find it interesting these men are not from ethnic groups with significant Orthodox backgrounds, they are British, German, and Scandinavian Americans. I myself am an American whose ancestry is not from significantly Orthodox ethnic groups (Dutch, Filipino). It's interesting he mentions people being caught up in their "ethnic ghettos". It seems here in America there is much division based on race. Perhaps more so now than when this video was made.
+James Vander Vegt
here is an excellent book in question / answer format for western inquirers into Eastern Orthodoxy. it is filled with references to the Scriptures.
books.google (*dot*) com/books?id=mcG8AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover
i was formerly protestant for 28+ years before learning of Eastern Orthodoxy. time permitting, please also see the 3 'christianity timeline' images i have posted on the below website.
regards,
theOrthodoxFaith (*dot*) org
+Godly Mathew Will I be accepted as an American of mixed Dutch Asian ancestry.
+James Vander Vegt
i am actually Asian myself (born in India) living in the US (Philadelphia) and i attend a Russian Orthodox parish. i also visit Georgian, Greek, and American parishes and i'm warmly recieved by all.
your ethnicity does not matter in anyway. even if you feel uncomfortable (as i did), keep attending for a few weeks and soon you will get over it. you may feel a bit self-conscious initially but after a few visits you will easily get over it.
just be aware that the Orthodox Church practices closed communion - meaning only Orthodox Christians may take the Eucharist (Holy Communion). i have to wait until i become Orthodox (via baptism in my case) before i may partake of the Eucharist.
please see the below article about Eastern Orthodoxy around the world, including Philippines, Mongolia, Pakistan, Thailand, Cambodia, Cote d’Ivoire, Kenya, and my own country India:
pravmir (*dot*) com/apostles-twenty-first-century/
+Godly Mathew All right that is interesting considering I am Asian (Filipino and Chinese) on my mother's side. Do you know any Dutch Orthodox Christians considering I am Dutch on my father's side?
James 2:24, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” We could toss scriptures back and forth all day, but it really wouldn’t get us anywhere. And that’s what the article I suggested you read is all about. Without a shared context, two people can interpret the Bible to mean anything they please-which is one reason why we desperately need the Church. Without its God-given authority, one can easily end up where Joseph Smith did-inventing a new religion entirely.
Pleasure to meet you as well!
Umm, icons aren't graven, they are painted (or "written" in orthodoxspeak :))
Dictionary definition of graven: carved; sculptured: a graven idol.
Paint is not mentioned anywhere in the 10 commandments
Also, do not think for a moment that I doubt either the devotion to Christ, or the salvation, of William Tyndale and the many other Christians from traditions outside Orthodoxy who have been, and continue to be, martyred for their faith. We all love and worship the same Lord-that’s not in question. My only point, honestly, is that the Church is the reason we have the Bible, and not the other way around.
Спаси Господь!
icons are the reason why their faith is so strong, the orthodox church is also more a cultural and ethnical church similar to juduasm instead just a religion. Icons are an important expression of culture and art.
you dont understand and wont never understand it.
whether they called it that or not; the powers it claimed and the theology of the unique office that Peter was given by Christ have always been implicit in the actions of the See.
The first Seven Councils never denied what Rome was teaching about itself, and quite often the Patriarchs of Constantinople even wholly submitted to the teaching by not resisting it and continuing to refer to the Patriarch of Rome as "the Sacred Head of the Church," and so on.
So Americanized I hardly recognize Orthodoxy here...forgive me...I miss Russia...
Orthodoxy in America is a joke. Church boards are dominated by Masons, Rotarians, etc. who have no clue about Orthodoxy. Arrogant formally educated snobs are church presidents.
karen prescott I wouldn't make these wide generalizations...
+karen prescott so, you dont belive that Jesus is universal Salvator? He didnt died for all peoples?hmmm?
for Orthodoxy in America to take root, it must seek fidelity to *Holy Tradition*, the pure undefiled faith of the Fathers, and not attempt to define itself according to contemporary innovations and heterodoxy.
the root of all innovations and heresy is human pride. we must resist the temptation to fit in with the papists, protestants, and other false sects.
it is good that converts are coming to Orthodoxy, but we must preserve Orthodoxy in all its fullness and not acquiesce to modifying the faith to suit 'western tastes'.
Godly Mathew What are the differences between the Orthodox Church of America and the Greek Orthodox Church? Seems like the Greek Orthodox Church has a more full communion with the original Orthodox Church?
JOHN WESLEY AND EASTERN ORTHODOXY:
Influences, Convergences, and Differences
Randy L. Maddox: "despite [Wesley's] sympathies with early Greek theologians, Wesley offered generally negative judgements concerning contemporary Eastern Orthodox life and thought-in keeping with most Western Protestantism, though perhaps less nuanced than some Anglicans of his day."
It's a tough thing to make sense of, the schism between East and West. The Nestorians and Monophysites are pretty easy to understand (and heal) comparatively, but East and West is extremely complicated.
I was raised Protestant, until I awoke to the ancient and true Church, first in the context of Roman Catholicism, and then in the context of both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. I am in the process of conversion to the Roman Catholic Church.
The thing is, Rome didn't technically split from..
And a little finisher for both of us dear brother :P Whilst the bible is certainly old, there is no evidence that the apostles ever preached the teachings in it. The books included in the bible etc. Or hold on, the church may have the answer, if we let it speak for itself in history and according to the truth we both hold unto. Plenty of love dear brother
Hm. One thing in common these early fellows had, was a longing to return to the Orthodox Faith. This is why Huss was burned, for instance. Not trying to create a new form of Christianity, but trying to reach back to what had been lost when the Roman pope created the Schism.
They don't know they are wrong. They think they are right. You and I know that the Orthodox faith is the One True Faith, but that doesn't make them beyond God's mercy; they think (wrongly) that what the are doing is right. They wouldn't do it otherwise. God knows their hearts. You and I do not, unless you happen to be a clairvoyant elder and you're not telling me.
There was a time when God communicated directly with His chosen people, the Jews. Some of what He said included instructions on who would be set apart for a priesthood, what they should wear, and a great many things they should do. Because God told them to do it, they did it.
I notice that these priests are not Jewish, yet the way they look and the things they do are far from ordinary. Did God establish a particular way for them to be chosen, set apart, act, how to dress what to do, etc.? When?
Just had to correct that interpretation beloved brother, forgive me if i presented it in a hard way, but the truth needs to prevail, all that matters.
When a church, Orthodox or other, calls the Pope of Rome "Head Among Equals", this should be a wake-up call for you.
KingDarius ServantofChrist if they merge with RCC I will run out of there
That's how the bishop of Rome has always been regarded.
B Gail Why? We should pray for reunion, not dread it.
And please let´s be honest, how many times did not the apostles break bread, fast and even have council with elders & priests. All is recorded in scripture, but modern churches are often brushing away that part so that the church in book of acts are a church of that time, not of our time. The apostles were the closest ones to the Lord, but instead of following their example modern churches want to exclude them.
Well, that’s only if you’re reading Martin Luther’s German translation of the New Testament, in which he added “alone” to St. Paul’s words. Actually, if you’re at all interested in understanding the Orthodox approach to scripture, it’s summed up much more concisely, comprehensively, and elegantly than I could likely manage in an excellent article called, “How the Church Reads the Church,” on the blog, “Glory to God for All Things.” Google that, and it’ll be the first result you see. Blessings!
What the apostles considered to be their fellow-laborers (like Titus and Timothy) were later (after their deaths) considered to be bishops. The writings of Ignatius of Antioch only came about in A.D. 107. Nevertheless, if he believed this teaching from the beginning of his work (c. A.D. 69), this might fit the Apostle John's critique of the "antichrists" who love "the preeminence among them" and are the "conquerors of the people" (i.e. Nicolaitans, followers of Balaam), who put themselves in the place of God (2 Thess. 2:3-4).
Saliba has a theatrical beard that he glues on for an apearence.
Chief, what I am saying is that there was no single religion called Gnosticism, and so, there was no one school to support it, either in Alexandria, Athens, Andalusia. To say there was is a misleading over-simplification. SO, there were no "these people" out there altering these or other texts. The one exception may be Marcion, a wealthy Christian who financed his own altered version of the Scriptures to support notions very similar to much of modern Protestantism.
Eucharist means no other thing, but thanks, thank you.
And - if you wish to continue this discussion, please contact me by email or IM.
I would absolutely brother, but i assume that they believed what they wrote cause their wonderful church provided me with that info, not that i actually assume it out of heaven
That's absurd. Have you ever bothered to go to an Orthodox service and ask the worshipers themselves what it is they think they're doing, or are you content to judge and condemn at a distance without hearing it from the horse's mouth?
Jesus therefore established that church to have his perfect body be presented to a world where it does not fit in. That´s why people need to hear a funny, creative and soooo modern sermons, so that the church won´t become booring. With other words culture>church and not church>culture
Priests (even bishops) are deposed if evidence is beyond reasonable doubt. The O.C. does not abide by any statute of limitations. If there is a court trial, they are suspended for the duration. If convicted, they are deposed. If the former priest is non-celibant, he is deposed to the rank of layman. If he was a hieromonk (priestmonk), he is deposed to the rank of monk and restricted to a monastery where he must carry out his penance. In all cases, they are never protected from legal process.
Vachief, the missing verses (yes, there are quite a few!) trace back to the time and center of the Arian rebellion against the Orthodox Church. Arius, of course, claimed that Christ is a special creation and not God Incarnate. Interestingly, the 3,000+ variations in the Alexandrian papyrii all serve to support his notions. The Orthodox Church does NOT recognise that textform, but draws its NT authorities from the Byzantine (think, Textus Receptus).
:) Nice to meet you my friend
actually it is. this is a tradition which has been handed down to Orthodox. it is supposed to be a distinguishing feature of a man and someone who isn't a pagan. Go take a look at monastics and you will see that they all have beards.
that ending... :')
How do you know they didn't use anything as a tool of worship? Cause it's not in the Bible? That doesn't mean they didn't, it just means you aren't willing to read other early Church documents to expand your mind and learn more about the early Church. I notice that you have ignored several times the fact that both the Hebrews and early Christians used images in their worship. Could it be you don't have a good answer to that fact? Finally, look at the 3rd definition of grave, it is to engrave.
EYXAPICTOC means exactly that: THANKS.
So, you don't belong to a church, have a pastor, or read any books in particular?
body who happens to know what the word really means. I have tried to explain basic principles about Bible (or any text) translation, but you don't seem to grasp that all other languages are not necessarily clever codes for English. E.g., "elohim" in Hebrew means, literally, "high and lifted up one(s)." It is used in Gen. 1 for God, in Job 1 for the angels, and in the Psalms for the people of God, and for kings and judges. Obviously, a translator has is work cut out for him when confronting this
Except that the in the bible, we see people follow the apostles to break bread and pray "The prayers" (Acts 2:42) togheter, please check the reference up so you don´t take my word for granted, but the word of God. Or when we read in the word of God (1 Timothy 4:13-16) that there was a council of elders. 1 Corinthians 11:23-32 maybe can help you aswell dear brother.
Yep, what I get for feeling sorry for the lad.
Your comment is irrelevant to what I was trying to portrait through mine. I believe that Holy Tradition is the source of the Bible so therefore the Church became first before New Testament and the CHURCH is the one that preserve the FAITH unchanged and interprets the Bible NOT Sola Scriptura ~ The way of perdition in time ~ (as I call it :-) ) like the PROTESTANTS do.
but you managed not to notice it. I told you that I do not endorse the Alexandrian textform, but you keep telling me why you don't like it. If you want to look more closely at what Gnosticism actually looks like today, I will give you a hint. The main plan is that the members have knowledge only members are given, that there is some secret about who Jesus is outside of what the Church has always taught, and that there are special rules to show one is a member. In all these ways, you are Gnostic.
The Early Church was BOTH culturally Greek and culturally Semitic. Galatians and Hebrews were written to smooth out he details about what it means to be a Christian, and how being in Jesus Christ makes Greekness and Hebrewness irrelevant.
The Orthodox Church incorporates MANY languages and cultures, and it always has. If I may be so bold as to speculate, it would appear that you've made a gross oversimplification in order to justify your inability to ask new questions.
The difference is only in the the hymns and iconography. The service is the same everywhere. The theology is the same. And don't start about the icons, please. If you want, I'm sure there are plenty Orthodox on youtube, who will gladly discuss this with you, but not me. I'm a lazy student.
So what do y:all think of Mormons?
they are heretics.
So what? You think the Protestants didn't do worse in Geneva and elsewhere?
No, no Christian believer or group is innocent. Nobody has clean hands; all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
And when you realise that we dont worship icons nor Mary the blessed virgin, please come to the church of Christ to see how beautiful we combine the scripture into reality, as was the purpose of the church. When you realise that evangelicalism cant provide information to you why there were elders, priests and liturgical prayers in the new testament, and why they can´t give proof that their church is the one of Christ, then please pay a visit to our beloved home of Christ :)
Axios , Axios, Axios
so these bunch of people are forming the evangelical orthodox church?
This is not possible.
+Comet Halley lol
Comet Halley Probably the North American Orthodox Church.
Comet Halley ewwww
Do you know anything about the early church? How do you think the early church worshipped? Didn't the Apostles gather to pray and worship? You seriously need to do research, instead of making hollow remarks.
Yes, there were bishops in the early church. No one who believes Scripture disputes this. But when the wolves crept in, "ARCH" rule, began to be tacked on to bishop, EPISKOPOS became ARKHI-EPISKOPOS; that which the Lord Himself commanded not to do.
Matt.20:25,26. But Jesus called them to and said. " You know that the rulers (ARKHONTES) of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who exercise authority over them.
"Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your sevant."
Well, the difference is due to ethnicity and autonomy. Nothing else.
You say you are a student of Church history, yet all you come up with from your studies is a load of unfounded accusations against people and events it doesn't even know. "Gnosticism" is a modern label for a group of beliefs which applied used Christian language to teach pre-Christian philosophical views. In the language of the time, "gnostic" simply meant "one having knowledge." So, Clement of Alexandria used that word in its proper context of his day, not as a 20th c. theology teacher.
Chief, no name calling here.. I was plain that I do not choose to believe you are such as your arguments present you. I have begged you to give your sources. Why? Because they are so ridiculously skewed that they are left with no recognisable basis in historical fact. Your reply here is a perfect example. You, or your sources, make up a category, call it "Gnostic," and populate it with the names of people you apparently have never read. I tried to explain to you the origin of the word "gnostic,"
hope you are not that far into that trip. I have known folks that were. They typically might also have gone for snake juggling contests and Jesus-only baptism, but that is another story for another day. From what I have been able to gather, you belong to a fairly small Baptist or Brethren group which is fairly well convinced that everybody else is in damnable error, and so you see no need to show an ounce of respect for anyone who would hold a different view than your own. If you want to stay
it doesn't work when you make it too obvious that you're being deliberate dude
@Chad Rook that's an oversimplification if I ever heard one.
Aaathe word ' Orthodox' means Right, Correct ( Christian Belief) ♥
i am roman catholic, and i have respect for the Orthodox Churches. But there is disunity. That is a sad fact of history. I once knelt down in a public parking lot and asked a Greek Orthodox Priest to give me his blessing, because i know he is a real priest, as much as my roman catholic parish priest. I like the way Pope John Paul said it. The western Church and the eastern Church are two lungs of the One True Holy Apostollic Church. I dont appreciate an Orthodox telling me that the Catholic Church is false.
The problem with the 'lung theory' is that Orthodoxy and Roman-catholicism are separated because of doctrinal differences (which were increased since 1054) and not just ecclesiastical diplomacy. Thus, if we accept the Church as the Body of Christ how could be possible for the same Body to consist by two members not sharing the same faith neither communion to each other? Is Christ divided? Let it not be so! That's why the Orthodox say that Roman-catholics are wrong. We simply can not be both right. That is not a matter of hatred toward Roman-catholics, but consistency with our faith.
i think the doctrinal differences could be overcome. i think the differences are more a matter of the trajectory of history, beginning with the division of the empire by Constantine, and the constant interference of the Emperors, and the deference of the Church to the State.
It is true that the schism had also a political background and it was not a sudden event that took place in 1054. The schism of 1054 was only the final result of a long process that began mainly after the collapse of the western part of the Roman Empire (476 AD). After that Popes had a more and more independent (from Constantinople) role in both ecclesiastical and political issues (their involvement to politics was inevitable up to an extend since Church was the only form of organised governmece after the collapse of roman west). However the political fact that accelerated the separation between East and West was the conquer of Rome by the German tribe of Franks at the early 11th century and the consequest occupation of the See of Rome by Frankish Popes. Franks due to their rivalry with the Eastern Roman Empire not only began to have claims on the Roman legacy as a whole (they named their state as 'Holy Roman Empire of German Nation') but they also used Papacy in order to prevent the influence of the Eastern Empire to its former western provices (mainly Italy and western Balkans). How did they used Papacy? They officialy adopted the controversial doctine of filioque (contrary to the Canons of 2nd and 3rd Ecumanical Councils) so as to cut the ecclesiastical "bridges" between East and West. The official schism of 1054 was then only a matter of time. Finally the 4th crucade of 1204 and the sacking of Constantinople destroyed any chance of reconciliation.
These men were ordained too rapidly and without any formation; and made deacons upon Chrismation (not even lector and hypodeacon for a time; what about seminary?). Why would Metro Philippos do this given his record for discretion? Impose not thy hands lightly upon any man. Enthusiasm is good, but too much of a good thing here, I think. Glory to Christ in any case.
You, my friend, have no idea what are you are talking about. Read Corithians, read epistle to Dignetus, and all the apostolic fathers. Beard or no beard - it is a custom. In Serbia, priests have beards, but it is not an obligation. It is not crucial. Liturgy is, unity of the Church is, mission of the Church is. Come and see - said the Lord. He mentioned no beards, just love and eucharist.
May God grant all the orthodox His mercy and His peace.
lol, you think it is a false religion because some people have long titles and fancy rituals? You don't have communion in your church or baptism? Why do you partake in those rituals? I was not aware having a long title was named in the Bible as an indication of a false religion. It must be in the same book that says we should wear cargo shorts and t-shirts to our rock band worship service.
Let's be clear, there is a war and it is just plain ignorance for anyone to state that Islam is a peaceful religion. Read history. This was against the infidels has been going on since the birth of Islam.Islam does not pray to the same God. They state that Christ was only a prophet and the Holy Trinity is a heretical teaching.
Please pray, support and be heard, in any way, for these bishops and the plight of the remaining Orthodox under Islamic control in that region.
Its good to see the Orthodoxy is alive in America!
I was a Protestant for years ... now I’m the path to become an orthodox. May the Lord be merciful with my soul.
You're on the right path. God bless.
D Dawg thank u fella. God bless u too
Are you doing catechism?
He is Risen!
I will be attending my first Orthodox service this Sunday. Exited and nervous at the same time. I truly believe Orthodoxy is the true church established by Jesus.
How did that go, 6 years ago?
@@XantosShado I saw him commented on other Orhtodox video. He and his family are already baptized. Glory to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
These are protestants who became Orthodox because they studied church history and found to their surprise that the historic church of Christianity was the Orthodox Church. The Catholics were the original protestants leaving the church in the great schism of 1054 and the protestants came later splitting off from the Catholics. My Father is a former Protestant and my Mother a former Catholic. They returned to the Orthodox Church. To my brothers and sisters in Christ I say come home. The church did not die. It has always been here.
+Dirk Moffatt That's true man! I hope that all America will become Orthodox
+Dirk Moffatt I am Protestant and looking into Orthodoxy as I researched church history and it led me to them......my husband was ironically raised Russian Orthodox----me no religion but when we met a 26 ---ended up at Protestant churches all this time ........
+DebbieJo Lederer
i was formerly protestant (for 28+ years) and now a catechumen (someone preparing for baptism) in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
here is an excellent book for protestants to read. it is in question / answer format and has plenty of scripture references.
*Dance, O Isaiah*
books.google (*dot*) com/books?id=mcG8AwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover
you can click the gear icon and download it as a pdf for local viewing.
if you prefer audio, this is a very good site for protestants to learn about Orthodoxy.
*Our Life in Christ*
ourLifeInChrist (*dot*) com
there are various topics on the right hand side you can download the audio for.
time permitting, please also visit my site below
regards,
theOrthodoxFaith (*dot*) org.
Wow thanks alot!!!
+Godly Mathew Do they believe that other Christians aren't saved? In Protestant churchs as long as you are saved you can take communion -----What I am asking is If you are an Orthodox are you taught to dislike the other denominations ----as I don't think i could ---I kinda went through that as a Seventh Day Adventist-----I think we need to love everyone no matter which way they worship but yes encourage them the way you believe to be the best way.........(as long as that agrees with the bible)
The Orthodox Church is the true church! The church should never had been "modernised" to suit mankind! It is Gods house! Unchanged forever!
All Christian's should return to the Orthodox Church and be saved! Amen!
America will become Orthodox in the end! Jesus is our lord and father in heaven!
WELL SAID TASOS!!!!
No it isn't. The Roman Catholic Church is the one true church! My ancestors fled Albania to Italy in the 15th Century after Constantinople fell to the Turks. Without the RCC, Christianity would have been only a footnote in history. If the Orthodox Church is the true church, then why did God let its capital fall to the infidel Turks?
@@mrbushlied7742 the capital of the Orthodox Church is not in Constantinople the capital of Orthodoxy is Heaven itself
@@mrbushlied7742 anninos56.blogspot.com/2019/12/the-vatican-church-is-no-longer.html?m=0
I had emergency Cancer surgery on my back October 28th, and.my ex wife had a stroke 3 days before that. I'also been diagnosed with multiple myeloma. A pay dispute with my company has left me with nothing for Christmas. Please pray for us.
Ray anxious Kathy.
The Virgin Mary in the Orthodox Church, is the most important Saint. The only women allowed in the altar. It might seem like the Orthodox Church is only secluded to Men. Tis not true, there are many important poisition a for women in the Orthodox Church, many.
Here I am 44 years later on the road home. It was under the preaching of Jack Sparks in the streets of Berkeley in 1971 that I was called into the ministry. I followed the comings and goings of Jack and the brothers of the Yellow Deli, NCAO, EOC and now St. Athanasius Church and University. What a mighty legacy these brothers have left and paths clear enough that others will follow. Thanks to Father Braun I have my own copy of the Orthodox Bible He and Fr. Jack worked on. I am so blessed to have stumbled onto this document. In Berkeley I lived on the roof of God's Love and passed out the "Right On" newspaper. Now that same love continues to lead me and tonight I am here praising Jesus with all my heart.
Bob Bonnell Great comment brother. Have some great links to send you relating to that time if you'd like to receive them, videos. Just let me know an email. The Lord be with you.
Amazing story. God bless.
@Bob Bonnell I remember hearing Peter Gillquist, Gordon Walker and Ray Nethery--who didn't join the rest in their journey to Orthodoxy--at Grace Haven Farm in Mansfield, OH in ... was it 1971 or 72? Yikes! So long ago but my life and faith were impacted by them as a teenager. Although I am not Orthodox and as an older adult embraced the Reformed tradition and world view, I greatly admire these men. I recently read Fr. Peter Gillquist's book _Becoming Orthodox_ which I highly recommend to anyone who wants to learn of their pilgrimage to Orthodoxy. Blessings, brother
Eternal be the memory of Metropolitan Philip
Memory Eternal
by definition of the Greek word idiolatria. icons are not idols, statues and busts are idols
some statues are sacred art too, people using their God given talents and their own personal efforts to make them.
The Orthodox Church doesn't just believe in the bible, but a multitude of scriptures. The bible isn't everything, just a compilation of important events
well, the bible is very important. just because we're not sola scriptura types doesn't mean we should underplay the good book
"But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?" James 2:20
Amen! But who's works? The answer is in Ephesians 2:10: "...good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them".
Why? Because, verse 9: "Not of works, lest any man should boast".
Also Titus 3:5-7: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 That being justified by his grace..."
Ernest E.W. Herman The Orthodox understanding of salvation doesn't put works as the only presupposition of salvation. The salvation comes through the Grace and the mercy of God. We just say that in the question of what shows the will of a human to be saved the answer is not faith alone
GreekPontus I might not understand exactly the way that you put it. But since we talk about the works which God requires us to do in order to be saved then that is in
John 6:29: "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." Or this one:
John 5:24: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."
Ernest E.W. Herman Indeed you seem not to understand my friend. The salvation is almost equal with the "theosis", the connection between a human and God. Of course we can't be united with the divine nature of God, but it can happen through His Grace (the uncreated energy of God for our salvation) John 1:17. This unity can't be achieved without God’s help (Ephesians 2:8). What God does (the action of His divine Grace) is immeasurably greater than what man does (his will, which is expressed through the faith and the works) Hebrews 4:16, Ephesians 4:7, 2 Corinthians 12:9. According to the Orthodox understanding the protestants emphasize more in one factor of the human will (the faith), instead of the action of God (which is the most important). I hope I helped you understand our perspective
GreekPontus Thanks for being willing to educate me, hope you’ll continue to do so.
First, I want to inform you that I do NOT care of the Protestants’ views. What authority do they have before God? John 1:11-13 tells us that those who believe in Christ God “to them gave He power to become the sons of God”, not Protestants. Just forget them. God tells us also that He will judge us “by that man whom he hath ordained”, namely Jesus - not by the Protestants (Acts 17:31). Moreover, Jesus tells us explicitly in John 12:48 that “the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day”, not the Protestants’ word.
Now I have several questions in regard of your very deep thoughts but today, with your very permission, I’ll address you just this one:
You said “the connection between a human and God”
My question: Since God is “purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity” (Hab. 1:13), how can Him be connected so intimately with the man who is dead, “dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephes. 2:1)? Since the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), how can he be connected with the living God?