this is ridiculous. i'm a jackass with all my own warts. i've met you and you're a great guy. you absolutely care about other people. to the extent i have time to measure my words in writing, i can come off nicer or "better" than i really am. we all carry our own crap. the jesus dude is cool though. so is Jeff!!!
I agree man, I think a lot of people (including me) choose to think that it is very easy to just believe God and forget to actually practice how He wants us to be. But right now I'm just undecisive and confused on which type of Christianity is the "true" one, if any.
You are right and I apologize for not clarifying. I was assuming Western and, further American audience and believers. Absolutely Orthodox and Antioch, etc go back as a real organized presences to, what, the 5th century? They were most affected as far as defectors, though by the Roman Catholic Church and issues of Protestantism don't really apply or relate. It could definitely be argued that they are a closer link to the earliest worship and dogma since they come out of (and remained in) the most important geographical locations) but as such their influence always was and remained regional. I still think that the current face of Christianity would not come close to have existing without the Roman Catholic cohesion, control, development, and expansion.
enjoy the journey and don't worry too much. keep seeking God and live in the confidence that He/It loves you despite the fact you're never going to have all the answers. there is something to be said for the wonder of God. you can always email me if you just need someone to talk things through with.
Would the Orthodox Church be considered a defector from Catholicism? It seems to me that other than geography they have a pretty strong claim on being the original church (institution as opposed to building).
Bah, I can fool anyone over lunch! But don't worry, I do not want my posts to be read too reverently. I will not start a cult of Max, but you exist to me as your written bbs persona. Those are your expressed thoughts and thus you. Actions in the real world mean nothing other than what you describe here. That is what I mean when I talk about sensing the difference. I come accross nicer on this bbs or in person than I really am and even still I am known as an arrogant ass. It is part of my persona and I embrace it and some people even find it charming but, ultimately, even that nonsense is filtered by my gatekeeper (who lately has not been doing a good job with regards to the wife - man have I been saying some stupid things). Obviously you are flawed - you like baseball and the Astros way too much.
A boy asked a monk about Amita Buddha's paradise. The monk said that it is said to exist at the utmost end of the earth towards the west. The boy thinking he could show the monk his ignorance said, "but since the Earth is round if you keep on going west you will eventually come back to were you began. So how can the paradise be in the utmost west?" The monk then said, "I see you know then where the paradise is" and then smiled.
Man, I am posting so much today. No, I wouldn't say defector, I would say concurrent development that was a little slower to organize. Keep in mind just how many different types of "Christianity" there were in the first three centuries. Big differences, little differences, it was theological madness. As I said, Roman Catholic organized faster due to Constantine and piggybacking imperial Rome (they both needed each other, so piggybacking is not meant to imply inferiority, just maintaining comfort levels) and was immediately set on expanding. Eastern Christian thought was just a different track and got walled in as far a growth.
Though wasn't the Orthodox church one and the same with the Roman church up until the time of Justinian?
That was when it solidified as a bigger counter to Rome, but I would say it was continuing a tradition in the region that had been going on the whole time prior as opposed to something like the Reformation. It is just that Rome didn't care until Justinian.
Great to see you again MM. Just to warn you I might not be able to answer a lot of your questions as I am far from an expert on Buddhism.
I think this is probably accurate. But I am not convinced it was a good thing. The gnostic and ascetic churches had huge following as well until Constantine basically endorsed one version with a governmental regime. Paul alludes to this in 2 Corinthians 12:11-13 when he refers to "super-apostles", possibly hinting at his own chuch's comparative lack of popularity. The early writers did not get along very well and constantly called each other heretics. Peter and Paul hated each others guts. Hundreds of years later the “Peter” churches started to see Paul’s letters would be “wicked cool” politically. Paul’s churches had grown considerably and most of them believed in a very strong centralized church, gave a lot of weight to the “scriptures” as the foundation of Christian faith, and also had a huge problem with the independence of women and disagreed with the idea of women as church leaders. Naturally, this would be a big hit to the growing Aesthetic church which at that time allowed women as leaders (conveniant!). Very few of the other books had this concept of Jesus and in fact most of the other writings said quite the opposite. That’s why certain books like the Gospel of Mary Magdalene were burned during Constantine’s era – not just to hurt Gnosticism, but also Aesceticism which had become borderline feminist and didn’t fit with his/their idea of a male dominated world. Anyhow - I guess my point here is that to claim some "wonderful nature" to Roman Catholic control is complete hooey. For the most part, the domination of catholicism was derived in rather dubious fashion and the results... Well the results are one heck of a mixed bag.
I never claimed such a thing. Can't tell if you think I was. My original point was that it is silly for Protestants to talk trash about Catholics not being Christians and the like because they are the reason Protestants are Christians in the first place, they produced the Bible, etc. That was my main point. It was not a judgment call on what was good or better or who should have won the wacky showdown of the hundred Christianities in Late Antiquity.
Somehow I'm reminded of this... <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ExWfh6sGyso&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ExWfh6sGyso&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
