Religion / End Times

[Guest]

I have never read about a Pope in the Bible. Maybe I missed it. Also, I don't recall Confession booths and asking a human being to absolve other human beings of their sins.

I don't know about nuns, but...
Matthew 16:18
And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
John 20:23
Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

Nope.

[John]

** 13-Aug-2023 World View: History of Christian branches and sects

There is some debate in this thread over
which branch of Christianity is "true"
Christianity -- Orthodox, Catholic or
Protestant. In fact, it could be argued
that the "true" Churches are the
"Oriental Orthodox Christian" churches,
comprised of the Ethiopian, Coptic
(Egyptian), Armenian, Syrian, Indian and
Eritrean Churches, since all of these
churches existed since apostolic times.

In my 2018 book on the history of Iran
and Islam, I wanted to make the history
of Islam understandable to Western
readers, and so I included a chapter
entitled "Brief history of Catholic and
Orthodox Christian 'Ecumenical'
Councils," so that I could compare the
histories of Islam and Christianity.
The following are excerpts from this
chapter.

**** Development of Christian theology

For the sake of comparison, we end this
discussion of the Koran and Sharia
(Islamic) law with a brief history of
the development of Christian theology,
and the numerous splits within Christian
Churches. For this serious reader this
serves two purposes. First, it
describes several points of intersection
between the developments of Islam and
Christianity. And second, it allows
comparison and contrast between how
controversies and schisms are handled in
the two religions.

**** The Ecumenical Councils

Christianity's first Ecumenical Council
was held in 325 AD in Nicea, an ancient
city just east of today's Istanbul
(Constantinople). The Council of Nicea
was a meeting of all Christian churches,
led not by the Pope but by the Emperor
Caesar Flavius Constantine of Rome. The
objective of the meeting was to unify
the different regional branches, and to
resolve some important questions.

At that time, many questions of
Christian theology had not yet been
decided. One of the most important was
the divinity of Jesus Christ. If Jesus
was born, then how could he be divine?
Although there was debate, the Council
ratified the view that he was a man, but
was God in the form of human flesh.

The details of how it makes sense that
Jesus was both human and divine were
extremely controversial. It was
discussed further at the Second
Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in
381, again in the Third Ecumenical
Council, held in Ephesus, an Aegean sea
port, in 431. By the time of the Fourth
Ecumenical Council, held in Chalcedon,
near Constantinople, in 451, the
differences on this issue were extremely
vitriolic.

This was the time of the first major
split within Christianity, as six
branches of Christianity refused to
recognize the Fourth Ecumenical Council,
in a controversy that has never been
resolved. Today, these are usually
called the "Oriental Orthodox Christian"
churches, comprised of the Ethiopian,
Coptic (Egyptian), Armenian, Syrian,
Indian and Eritrean Churches. These
were all churches that had existed since
apostolic times, and the major political
issue was that they didn't wish to be
controlled by Rome. The Fifth
Ecumenical Council (in Constantinople in
553) and the Sixth Ecumenical Council
(in Constantinople in 680) attempted
without success to resolve the split.

**** The Seventh Ecumenical Council (787) - iconoclasts and iconophiles

The Seventh Ecumenical Council, in Nicea
in 787, is the last one that was
recognized. At this one, the major
controversy was was between the
"iconoclasts" and "iconophiles."
"Iconoclast" means "image smasher" or
destroyer of religious icons and
monuments. The iconoclasts, who were
outvoted, said that religious art was
idolatry and must be destroyed. If
Jesus is divine, is it not sacrilegious
to worship an icon of Jesus as if it
were Jesus himself? The iconophiles
loved icons, and argued that they were
man's dynamic way of expressing the
divine through art and beauty. The
latter argument won out.

The argument over icons was heavily
influenced by the rise of Islam at that
time. The Charlie Hebdo terror attack
in Paris in January 2015 was supposedly
motivated by prohibited artistic
representations of the Prophet Mohammed,
and this prohibition was coming into
effect at the time of the Seventh
Ecumenical Council.

**** The Catholic vs Orthodox Christian schism (1054)

That was the last time there was
sufficient unity in the Christian
churches to hold a worldwide Ecumenical
Council, although there were smaller
regional meetings.

In 1054, the Pope in Rome sent a letter
to the Patriarch of Constantinople
demanding that the latter submit to the
Pope as head of all the churches. The
Patriarch refused, and so the Pope and
the Patriarch excommunicated each other
on July 16, 1054. The "Schism of 1054"
has never been healed.

Things got much worse in 1204 during the
Crusades. The Catholics, on their way
to fighting the Muslims in Jerusalem,
sacked Constantinople, and placed a
prostitute on the Emperor's throne at
the church of St. Sophia. It was not
until 2001 when the Pope John Paul
visited Athens and, encountering large
anti-Catholic protests, that the
Catholics apologized for the sacking of
Constantinople, and made a plea for
forgiveness.

The Orthodox Christians were generally
excluded from the Ecumenical Councils
held by the Catholics over the
centuries, but they were controversial
nonetheless, even in modern times. The
Second Vatican Council held by the
Catholics in 1962-65 created a new split
within the Catholic Church, when the
Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) refused to
recognize the legitimacy of its edicts.
Pope Francis is currently working to
heal this rift.

It was at the time of the Second Vatican
Council that plans for an Ecumenical
Council of all the Orthodox Churches was
announced in 1961.

So in view of that history, it should
not be surprising to anyone that the
attempt to create a new Orthodox
Christian Ecumenical Council, a Great
and Holy Council (GHC) of Eastern
Orthodox Churches, announced in 1961,
has run into a great deal of
controversy, as controversy has always
been the norm, since the beginning.


**** Universal versus regional religions

It's the norm for religions to target
small regional or national populations.
You can be a "Catholic" anywhere in the
world, but you can't just be an
"Orthodox Christian." You have to be
"Orthodox Christian" PLUS a nationality,
such as a "Greek Orthodox" or a "Russian
Orthodox" or some other branch.

The same thing is true of the Protestant
religion, which has about 20 different
churches in the United States alone,
each targeting a different group.

In examining the history of religions,
there are two conflicting phenomena.
One is that a regional religion "becomes
viral" and expands into a worldwide
universal religion, and the other is
that a universal religion splinters into
regional religions.

In the case of Christianity, Judaism was
a local religion that expanded into a
more universal Christianity, and that
splintered into the Catholic religion,
which became truly universal, and
regional Orthodox and Apostolic
religions.

Islam has splintered into various sects,
including Sunni Islam, Shia Islam, and
smaller sects, such as the Zaydis,
Alawites and Sufis. Only Sunni Islam
has become truly universal.

The ancient Hindu religion has different
sects and philosophies, but the caste
system restricted the religion to India.
There was a splintering in the form of
Buddhism, which became a truly universal
religion.

There are only three religions that have
"gone viral" and become virtually
universal: Catholicism, Sunni Islam and
Buddhism. For example, in China, you'll
find plenty of Catholics, plenty of
Sunni Muslims, and plenty of Buddhists,
but few Greek Orthodox or Shia Muslims
or Hindus.

[Tom Mazanec]

As an astronomer (only BS but still) I find it an interesting coincidence that SN 1054 was seen at Earth just twelve days before the Schism (yes, July 4…another interesting coincidence).

[Cool Breeze]

Why was I censored yet again for a comment on religion, which is what this topic is? If you want to ban me, just do it already, John. You already do here what you bemoan of all those you consider evil, proving that it's all nonsense.

[JDav]

My questioning others was merely an attempt to find out how they arrived at their beliefs. If I offended, please forgive me. Unfortunately it seems that I'm more often met with insults than rational responses when I ask. We're told throughout life that we shouldn't discuss politics or religion - probably the two most important topics to mankind. That makes no sense to me. When I returned to the Catholic Church after a 20+ year absence I strove to learn about my faith and why I should believe as I do. I'm just curious as to how other people reach their conclusions - is it through rational, logical thought? Or because they were born that way. Believe me, I know plenty of Catholics who are so because that's what their parents were, and for no other reason. In the times ahead I think it's important to know not only WHAT you believe but WHY. Navigator wrote about that in his book. He is clearly informed of his beliefs. I saw no harm in asking how he arrived at them, since some aspects of his faith differ from my own.

[Guest]

My questioning others was merely an attempt to find out how they arrived at their beliefs. If I offended, please forgive me. Unfortunately it seems that I'm more often met with insults than rational responses when I ask. We're told throughout life that we shouldn't discuss politics or religion - probably the two most important topics to mankind. That makes no sense to me. When I returned to the Catholic Church after a 20+ year absence I strove to learn about my faith and why I should believe as I do. I'm just curious as to how other people reach their conclusions - is it through rational, logical thought? Or because they were born that way. Believe me, I know plenty of Catholics who are so because that's what their parents were, and for no other reason. In the times ahead I think it's important to know not only WHAT you believe but WHY. Navigator wrote about that in his book. He is clearly informed of his beliefs. I saw no harm in asking how he arrived at them, since some aspects of his faith differ from my own.

I have a question: Is the Catholic Church today a force for good? I think not. The news articles (and the additional articles linked to them) paint a very dark and deviant picture of a grossly dysfunctional organization that today is more concerned with cover ups and protecting shocking criminal behavior of its clergy. Pope Francis is incorrigible. Whether it is his behavior during the Argentine military dictatorship or his foul behavior towards victims and their families in Chile, or his behavior now protecting convicted rapists in Argentina. He is also protecting a clergyman in Slovenia who raped nuns...

Church attendance in Europe is in single digits. Catholics in Europe are more likely to turn out at anti-Catholic protests than attend mass. You can rant about how the mortals who run it don't matter because the Catholic Church is immortal or something like that, but that doesn't help the victims of the Catholic clergy.

I have a better question for you: WHY did you return to a church that is so obviously malignant and dysfunctional?

Would you send your grandsons to a Catholic school?

Your moral compass appears to be broken and you appear to have been blinded by the spectacle of ornate buildings and flowing papal robes.

[Tom Mazanec]

I am a Catholic because I believe Jesus founded His Church on Peter the first Pope. Jesus also said scandals would come but woe to those through whom they come.

[Cool Breeze]

I am a Catholic because I believe Jesus founded His Church on Peter the first Pope. Jesus also said scandals would come but woe to those through whom they come.

It's always interesting that the first council had James speak, and not Peter regarding what it seemed good "to the Holy Spirit and us", which (among many other things) shows that the eastern orthodox church position on all of this is correct, not the Roman Catholic one. All apostles share in the apostolic teaching and succession, and no one lacks anything. All that said, well meaning christians will all find that worshipping in spirit and in truth will reveal that increasingly as people pass into greater and greater apostasy, we will see a smaller number of people of this faith and spirit, regardless of what they call themselves outwardly. It must be said that what we call our faith, doctrine and practice from the point of view of what has been handed down to us, the revelation of Christ and His church, of course matters in terms of what should be practiced.

"Who do you say that I am?" is what differentiates christians from non christians, and as pointed out earlier, shows some groups not be actually be chrisitans. What happens to them on the last day, or judgment, is not up to me so speculating on it is irrelevant.

[Navigator]

The coming war with China/Russia will be a tough slog, and we will get through it in roughly the same shape as Britain/France post WW1.

After that, the decline we are experiencing will only accelerate. Countries/Governments as now known will not survive.

As a religious person, I believe this is what is prophesied in the Bible. And in the end it turns out very well for those with faith who are committed to that faith and its teachings.

If you could elaborate on the Biblical prophecy please.

I would start with kind of an "overview".

I believe that Christ will return in Glory to the Earth, and usher in an eon of almost unimaginable peace and prosperity, where he reigns as God on earth. People will cease to do evil, and the world will be free of war, disease, and suffering. This age is called the "Millennium" and is to last a thousand years.

Prior to this happening, the world will suffer the ravages of an anti-Christ, who will actually destroy a large percentage of humanity.

And before the temporary reign of terror by the anti-Christ, almost all will have the opportunity to chose to live under Christ's protection, or to reject it. A lot of people currently cannot make this choice due to lack of religious freedom (ala China, North Korea, Iran, etc.), hence a reason for WW3 (to destroy those regimes), and for an optimistic outlook in regards to how that war ends.

[Guest]

The coming war with China/Russia will be a tough slog, and we will get through it in roughly the same shape as Britain/France post WW1.

After that, the decline we are experiencing will only accelerate. Countries/Governments as now known will not survive.

As a religious person, I believe this is what is prophesied in the Bible. And in the end it turns out very well for those with faith who are committed to that faith and its teachings.

If you could elaborate on the Biblical prophecy please.

I would start with kind of an "overview".

I believe that Christ will return in Glory to the Earth, and usher in an eon of almost unimaginable peace and prosperity, where he reigns as God on earth. People will cease to do evil, and the world will be free of war, disease, and suffering. This age is called the "Millennium" and is to last a thousand years.

Prior to this happening, the world will suffer the ravages of an anti-Christ, who will actually destroy a large percentage of humanity.

And before the temporary reign of terror by the anti-Christ, almost all will have the opportunity to chose to live under Christ's protection, or to reject it. A lot of people currently cannot make this choice due to lack of religious freedom (ala China, North Korea, Iran, etc.), hence a reason for WW3 (to destroy those regimes), and for an optimistic outlook in regards to how that war ends.

Who do you think is the anti-Christ?