sullster

The topic, "Burnin' Satin's Handiwork" has strayed to a topic that I would like to see addressed head-on.

The two versions of Xtianity have caused wars, political upheavals, social revolutions and bigotry. The different approaches to the same set of myths continues to separate them.

How is an atheist to know which version of Xtianity considers itself to be the true one, with regards to its adherence to the basic concepts of the myth? Which one is "right"? Which one is "wrong"? Would the founders of the Xtain myths feel that these organizations reflect what they wanted?

Ojuice5001

Catholicism, definitely. They picked out the books of the Bible, so if they are wrong, so is anyone who bases his beliefs on the Bible. Also, they have an allegedly infallible Pope to guard them from error, while Protestants have only themselves, and disagreeing Protestants can't all be guarded from error and therefore right. Catholicism is a great tradition with a halfway decent theology, while Protestantism is a failed attempt to get back to the basics of the Bible.

Pitshade

Actually there are more than two. Besides RC and Protestantism, there are also the Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox and Coptic churches. These three are as old or older than Roman Catholicism. I've heard about small rural churches that think that only they know the 'true way.' I have to agree with Nietsczhe, who said the only true christian died on the cross.

[ January 06, 2002: Message edited by: Pitshade ]</p>

LianaLi

Actually, the Eastern Orthodox/Greek Orthodox church split from the Catholic curch some time during the first millenium. (I'm trying to peg down a year. I'm horrible with dates, but great with details.) They split over issues of icons, where the seat of power in the church should be located (Rome or Constantinople), and a few other issues. I don't know if the Orthodox church had divisions in itself after that, though.

-Liana

LianaLi

Actually found a site that dates <a href="http://www.goarch.org/access/orthodoxfaith/History.html" target="_blank">The Great Schism</a> in the 11th century.

But doing a google search shows that the orthodox tradition goes as far back as the 3rd century. I'd post more, but I've got to run to church now with the family.

-Liana

davidH

ok, what do u mean by the founders of the Xtain myths? There was only one founder - Jesus, but Christianity stretches far back in Judiasm.

Yeah it does get complicated but I'll try and explain the differences. I'm a Christian - Protestant. I believe the Christian faith to be true but the Catholic faith is where things start to get blurred and the Chriatian faith has become distorted.


1. How Christianity developed into Catholicism.

In the 300s AD Christianity was embraced by the Roman government, money and power began to flow into the church. Roman temples where given to the church and with them all the idols present in them. Those that used these temples still kept the statues and objects in them and didn't get rid of them as they should have. The faith began to be distorted by the acceptance of popular supersition. These statues where altered and statues of Jesus and Mary replaced them, as acts of respect these statues where prayed before and incoperated in worship.
Then lust after power began to affect these churches, they abandoned the gramatical historical method of interpreting the Bible and narratives were converted into allegories with symbolic meaning. This meant that the preacher could use a Bible passage and twist it to whatever message he wanted to give. The Bible lost authority and instead a new authority rose - the interpretor of the Bible.
This was the church hierarch, which asserted that they alone could interpret the Bible.
In connection with false doctrine, Ignatius says to the Magnesians;

So you see that now those churches looked to the bishops and finally to the pope as their final authority and not to the Bible as we would.
The man from which the quote is taken should have said - neither should you do anything without God.

The churches in which this was taught became the catholic churches.
In those days people were discouraged from the independant Bible study, and they gradually began to relate more and more to icons and temples than they did to the word of God the Bible. The catholic churches excused this change by pointing out that the people were illiterate and that it would be diverse to let each person reach their own conclusions.
This however shouldn't have been an excuse because public reading of the scriptures can allow people to learn and study them off by heart.
(1 Timothy 4:13 - Paul tells timothy this)
The church should have taken an interest in teaching the people to read. Especially since it was God's word - for everyone.

Yet there were churches that didn't succomb to the lust for power and they remained true to the public reading of scripture and the teaching of God's word.

But in these churches were the people weren't allowed to read the Bible for themselves - what was to stop anything alien to the Bible from entering the church.
Sure in medivel Britain - the Bible was read in Latin to the people - they couldn't understand a word! So how then could they put God's word into practise? They could only put the bishop's word into pratice.
True enough, false teaching did enter the church and they moved away from God. They prayed to Mary - nowhere is it recorded that Jesus said you can't pray to me but must pray to my earthly mother. Nowhere does Jesus say after his death that you have to say the Hail Mary 20 times before you are forgiven, no where does he say the u have to pay for your sins in purgatory.

Infact if you have to spend time in purgatory after you die to pay for your sins - what was the point in Jesus dying in the first place?

All these teachings entered the catholic churches that where alien to the Bible and Jesus teaching.

Then the church began to claim openly that it could generate new "divinely inspired" material apart from Biblical authority.

for instance, the church taught that the 2 swords found by peter in Luke 22:38 stood for 2 authorities established by God over human society
One sword was the civil government and the other the ecclesiastical (church) authority! On this basis it was possible for the church to command anything - that was why it was considered so powerful. That was why the crusades took place and the executions of thousands of protestant reformers took place.

If you find a site on the history of the catholic church read it. It gets really sickening whenever they resorted to executions to gain power of the people.
jews and reformers where murdered. The break off from the church was carried out by those known as the reformers. They saw the state the church was in and recognised it not as a religion of worship to a wonderful God but a power base for those who wanted to rule.
They began publishing the Bible in the language of the people and imediately met with strong resistance - many were burnt at the stake - beheaded etc. But God used the reformers and now many churches are as God wanted . Yet even today we see churches that are used as power bases - not just catholic ones. These churches have to be shown the truth and many have changed.

That is how the catholic church came to be - based on power and bloodshed. Sad.
I believe that the catholic faith has mixed God with myth and taken him from the people in order that power might be the leaders. Though there are churches that are seeing the truth and have come back to the pure teaching of God but they still hold to tradition. Until they abandon all I don't think they will ever be free. That is a religion that Jesus never wanted.

He even critised the pharises in his day because of their love of power and money.
You can read it in Matthew 23.
Jesus wanted us to be like him and show love to everyone. He wanted us to worship a great God and to worship freely.

If you want I can go through the Bible and show you were the Bible differs from what the catholics believe. Many many things have been told by the popes and bishops that aren't in the Bible and they have become accepted by the church as if it were the word of God. The word of God is the Bible and if it isn't in there or something is said that is alien to it, then it isn't the word of God.

Hope that helped u understand a bit more.
I know that the faith I follow is the Biblical faith and my faith is simple. There are no traditions that take anything away from Jesus. Everything revolves around him.

The reason there is war (N.Ireland) is because of the history of what happened - not directly related to the religion.

Orpheous99

That's easy, they all do and believe that other is mistaken.. Plus, to an atheist there would be no "true" one.

Ernest Sparks

LianaLi,

The year was 1054 A.D. Papal Legate Humbert got dissed by Patriarch Cerularius in Constantinople, so he and his entourage marched into the Hagia Sophia Church and set written anathemas on the altar, then headed home to Rome. It was a flap (not the first) between the western and eastern churches. It did not heal, but went critical within two centuries, when the fourth band of crusaders decided to storm Constantinople, rob, rape and murder, instead of waiting for the fun in Palestine. That made things pretty irreconcilable.

Folks usually ignore the existence of Orthodox churches, because orthoxians do such a good job of keeping themselves publicly hid (on the one hand) and making themselves look too spooky (on the other hand).

[ January 06, 2002: Message edited by: Ernest Sparks ]</p>

Pitshade

The Coptic Church of Egypt:

From <a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/rt_egypt.htm" target="_blank">Religioustolerance.org</a>

The Coptic church was supposedly founded by the apostle Mark in the first century C.E.

Here's an essay on the 'True Church, from the same site.

<a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_true.htm" target="_blank">WHICH IS THE "TRUE" CHRISTIAN CHURCH?</a>

Toto

The Greek Orthodox church considers itself the original Christian church, like they invented it. (They read the New Testament in its original language.) They trace their origins back to the original church founded by Peter, as the Catholics do - neither one admits to being an offshoot of the other.

The Orthodox do not have divisions based on differing interpretations of scripture, but they are divided by nationality. There is a Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, etc. This division reflects the fact that they use the national language in services, rather than a dead language, as the Catholics did. It also reflects the fact that the Orthodox do not believe in each person reading scripture, and reject the use of reason and logic as religious tools - since when people read the Bible for themselves, they inevitably disagree about its meaning. Orthodox practice is closer to mysticism than Catholicism.

But, more importantly, the Orthdox church is politically impotent. Most Orthodox churches are in countries that were part of the Ottoman Empire, and then were under Communist rule, and they survived by bending to power. This left them with little moral credibility. Orthodox churches in American are primarily centers of cultural preservation for Eastern European immigrants and their descendents. They are culturally conservative, but not as dogmatic as the Catholic Bishops.

The latest Orthodox-Catholic clash was the break up of Yugloslavia. Croatians are Catholic, Serbians are Orthodox. (Otherwise, they speak the same language and have the same genetic background.) The Pope has been blamed for contributing to the breakup - he wanted to see Croatians living in a Catholic country. At times during that war, Croatians said that the Croat-Serb division went back to 1054 - which can only be explained as a reference to the religious split, since neither group existed in that year.