Betatheism: Superheroes and the 21st Century Pagan Pantheon

[milos]

Romans 6:23
"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

INVISIBLE CHURCH=All people who seek Jesus for forgiveness from any church, anywhere, anytime in history.
This is dependent on the heart and only God sees the heart. But humans can guess based on a persons words and actions.

1Samuel16
7 But the Lord said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart."


VISIBLE CHURCH=The physical organizations we see today. Historically speaking there is no unbroken connection to any modern churches from the original 12 disciples. It doesnt matter either. Its the Invisible church that matters. Arguing about which modern church is the original is a waste of time. What matters is spreading the good news of Jesus to the world, which is happening. Christianity is growing across the globe faster than any other religion.

Historically speaking, the connection from the original 12 disciples was broken in the Patriarchate of Rome when they dropped off from the Church in 1054, from the Body of Christ, because they started preaching false beliefs, and so they were excluded from the Church. That is when the Church was called Eastern Orthodox, because of the four Patriarchates in the eastern Mediterranean - Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople - which preserved the true faith, unlike the Rome in the west. It does matter if one keeps true or false teachings when they call themselves a "Church".

The Church is the Body of Christ, and the Body of Christ is one and indivisible. There is only one Body of Christ, and therefore there is only one Church.

If you are claiming that Jesus founded only the "invisible Church", it is historically inaccurate. In the first place, Jesus himself was incarnated on Earth as a visible man in a human body, he was visibly preaching the Lord's teaching, he was visibly healing people and forgiving their sins, he visibly ordained first 12 apostles and gave them to eat his body and drink his blood. That is also what the "visible Church" is doing, the same as "visible Jesus", performing visible teachings and actions in the name of Jesus and with his presence and blessing, because Jesus is both God and High Priest present in his Church all the time, and ideally "visible" and "invisible" Church is one. The reason why in reality "visible" and "invisible" Church are not matched is because people have free will and therefore they can sin and not repent. But the people are those who are corrupted, not the Church, both "visible" and "invisible", because the Church itself is still one and holy. Of course that Jesus can be present wherever he wants, but the Church is his home.

Who decides which teachings are true and which are false? Well, the Church. So not all teachings that are called "Christian" are true, but only the ones which the Church approved. Why is that? Because Jesus is the Head of the Church, and he guides his Church to preserve true beliefs. But in contrary to the false "Church" in Vatican where they believe that one man, the Pope, is infallible when speaking ex cathedra, in the Church all decisions which concern the Christian belief are made by a council of bishops, and still they are not believed to be infallible, but those decisions must take the test of time, like in a true conservative manner. That is why we in the Eastern Orthodoxy never know, but we believe and hope, and try to surrender our will to Jesus. But in both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, they claim they know something. Some know the Pope is right, some know Martin Luther is right, some know Jean Calvin is right, some know they are saved, some know who is saved and who is not, some know the future from Biblical verses, etc. And they are all using the New Testament written and approved by the Eastern Orthodox Church and in a visible way, but they reject the Church that wrote it and approved it, which makes no sense. Using the visible New Testament written and approved by the visible Church, but still denying the same visible Church.

When the Antichrist arrive, he will most likely also call his teaching "Christian", and he will appear as a true Christian, that is why we stick to the "visible" Church in order to preserve our loyalty to Christ and true Christian beliefs, and not to be deceived by the Antichrist.

[milos]

Pertaining to all that you said prior to the below, I have to ask these questions.
Is GOD of Heaven so weak and so emasculated that you feel he can do nothing of his own initiative/power, without the "church"?
Who do you think instilled and guided the early Israelite nation, the then "Chosen People of GOD?"
Do you not think that if GOD wants his truth to survive in this world that he cannot do it on his own?
Why does HE need to rely on a man corrupted organization to do that?

Jesus had a couple words for the "church" of his time, speaking to the Scribes, Pharasies, and Saducees, you can find them in the following:

Point is, there is no man instituted "visible church". (Again a institution never mentioned in the Holy Writings.)

I never said that God can do nothing without his Church, but the visible Church is needed to call all people to salvation in a visible way. Because God gave us free will to follow him or not to follow him, and therefore we must be visibly offered a free choice.

God founded the Church on his own because he wanted his truth to survive. There are corrupted men in the Church, but the Church itself is not corrupted, but it is forever holy, because the Church is the Body of Christ, and the Body of Christ is forever holy and incorrupt.

Jesus is both Perfect God and Perfect Man, and he has instituted his visible Church, of which he is both God and High Priest.

[Snuffy]

No church can save you. Only Jesus saves, by grace through faith in His death and resurrection (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 10:9-10).

[milos]

No church can save you. Only Jesus saves, by grace through faith in His death and resurrection (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 10:9-10).

Of course that only Jesus saves.

But you say that Jesus founded only the "invisible" Church consisted of the saved ones, which is not true. Jesus ordained first twelve apostles, they ordained dozens of new apostles, and those ordained bishops, and bishops ordained priests, and priests ordained deacons, it is called apostolic succession, and it is the line of clergy which originates directly from Jesus Christ, it is the institution of the Church, together with the baptized believers.

Some apostles wrote gospels and epistles about Jesus' life and teachings, and they were accepted into the New Testament by the institution of the Church. It is the authority of the Church that gave the authority to the Holy Scriptures. Taking just the New Testament but rejecting the Church which brought it makes no sense whatsoever. The New Testament is part of the Church, and it can't be considered withouth the Church.

It also means that there is only one Church with one teaching, and everyone else calling themselves "Church" are imposters.

All of this and much more needed to be first before you could say "only Jesus saves, by grace through faith in His death and resurrection". You know that only Jesus saves because the institution of the Church told you so. Without the Church and its Scriptures, you would have known nothing about Jesus.

[T Hunt]

Historically speaking, the connection from the original 12 disciples was broken in the Patriarchate of Rome when they dropped off from the Church in 1054, from the Body of Christ, because they started preaching false beliefs, and so they were excluded from the Church. That is when the Church was called Eastern Orthodox, because of the four Patriarchates in the eastern Mediterranean - Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Constantinople - which preserved the true faith, unlike the Rome in the west. It does matter if one keeps true or false teachings when they call themselves a "Church".

Agreed, what a church teaches does matter. There are too many churches today that push gays or women pastors or forget about forgiveness or any number of other new age ideas that seep in.

The Church is the Body of Christ, and the Body of Christ is one and indivisible. There is only one Body of Christ, and therefore there is only one Church.

I would disagree. The body of christ is present whenever communion is taken. And as the Bible says, "where two or three come together in my name, there I am with them."

If you are claiming that Jesus founded only the "invisible Church", it is historically inaccurate. In the first place, Jesus himself was incarnated on Earth as a visible man in a human body, he was visibly preaching the Lord's teaching, he was visibly healing people and forgiving their sins, he visibly ordained first 12 apostles and gave them to eat his body and drink his blood. That is also what the "visible Church" is doing, the same as "visible Jesus", performing visible teachings and actions in the name of Jesus and with his presence and blessing, because Jesus is both God and High Priest present in his Church all the time, and ideally "visible" and "invisible" Church is one. The reason why in reality "visible" and "invisible" Church are not matched is because people have free will and therefore they can sin and not repent. But the people are those who are corrupted, not the Church, both "visible" and "invisible", because the Church itself is still one and holy. Of course that Jesus can be present wherever he wants, but the Church is his home.

Ok, but I dont see where he ever claimed that the visible church would continue in an unbroken line.
Think of it this way. Say my church, church A, is like the baptists and say that someone HAS to be an adult and be FULLY submerged in water in order to be baptized. Then say another church, church B, says that a few drops on a babies head are enough. And lets say this is enough for the two churches to not be in fellowship with each other.
But at the same time both churches still believe in Jesus forgiving our sins.

Well followers of both churches are still going to heaven even tho on baptism one is right and the other is wrong.
See where Im going with this?

Who decides which teachings are true and which are false? Well, the Church. So not all teachings that are called "Christian" are true, but only the ones which the Church approved. Why is that? Because Jesus is the Head of the Church, and he guides his Church to preserve true beliefs. But in contrary to the false "Church" in Vatican where they believe that one man, the Pope, is infallible when speaking ex cathedra, in the Church all decisions which concern the Christian belief are made by a council of bishops, and still they are not believed to be infallible, but those decisions must take the test of time, like in a true conservative manner. That is why we in the Eastern Orthodoxy never know, but we believe and hope, and try to surrender our will to Jesus. But in both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, they claim they know something. Some know the Pope is right, some know Martin Luther is right, some know Jean Calvin is right, some know they are saved, some know who is saved and who is not, some know the future from Biblical verses, etc. And they are all using the New Testament written and approved by the Eastern Orthodox Church and in a visible way, but they reject the Church that wrote it and approved it, which makes no sense. Using the visible New Testament written and approved by the visible Church, but still denying the same visible Church.

I disagree. The ONLY thing that determines what is and isnt correct teaching is the Bible, the word of God. Here is where the catholics went off the rails, they started using extra biblical sources to determine the will of God, things like the popes edicts and stuff. However, remember, Faith the size of a mustard seed will still save the soul. Mathmatically, any amount of faith greater than zero equals saving faith. (Faith>0=saved.)

When the Antichrist arrive, he will most likely also call his teaching "Christian", and he will appear as a true Christian, that is why we stick to the "visible" Church in order to preserve our loyalty to Christ and true Christian beliefs, and not to be deceived by the Antichrist.

I have always thought that the pope fit the description of the antichrist.

[milos]

I would disagree. The body of christ is present whenever communion is taken.

Yes. But there is only one Communion, one Body of Christ, one Church. So, one Church is the right one, one Communion is the right one.

That doesn't mean nobody else outside the Church can't have God's blessing or can't be in some kind of contact with Jesus, but if we speak about the Church and the Communion, only one is the right one, and all others are false.

Ok, but I dont see where he ever claimed that the visible church would continue in an unbroken line.
Think of it this way. Say my church, church A, is like the baptists and say that someone HAS to be an adult and be FULLY submerged in water in order to be baptized. Then say another church, church B, says that a few drops on a babies head are enough. And lets say this is enough for the two churches to not be in fellowship with each other.
But at the same time both churches still believe in Jesus forgiving our sins.

Well followers of both churches are still going to heaven even tho on baptism one is right and the other is wrong.
See where Im going with this?

Only God knows who is going to Heaven, we as people can't know, we can only guess or assume, but we can't know.

And then, there is only one baptism which is right, and it is in one Church which is right.

Protestants tend to see Christianity as an ideology, and then they discuss who got it right and who got it wrong. That is why there are so many denominations, because everyone believed they got it better than the previous one. But we in Eastern Orthodoxy follow the apostolic succession instead, it is the historical connection to historical Jesus, and although we don't know if he explicitly claimed "the visible Church would continue in an unbroken line", it naturally happened through the apostolic succession, and we highly appreciate it and call it holy. The hand of my priest is the hand of Jesus, through the apostolic succession. It is such an unimaginable holiness, above any discussion on who is right and who is wrong. It is such a holiness to receive the Body of Christ from Christ's hand during the Holy Communion because of the apostolic succession that everything else falls miles below.

I disagree. The ONLY thing that determines what is and isnt correct teaching is the Bible, the word of God. Here is where the catholics went off the rails, they started using extra biblical sources to determine the will of God, things like the popes edicts and stuff. However, remember, Faith the size of a mustard seed will still save the soul. Mathmatically, any amount of faith greater than zero equals saving faith. (Faith>0=saved.)

The New Testament is just one of the writings of the Church, but there are also many other writings of the Church as well. The gospels are just the Oral Tradition of the Church that was written down at some point. Sola Scriptura is a pure fantasy, it was never like that, but there was the Oral Tradition which left after Jesus, and many decades later some of it was written down. It is also a great misconception which some have that Christianity was based on the Book, that it is a religion of the Book - because Christianity was first, and the Book came after. So the Book was based on Christianity. Saint Peter didn't have the New Testament. Saint Paul didn't have the New Testament. But they had the Oral Tradition and the Church.

I have always thought that the pope fit the description of the antichrist.

I thought it as well, but I am not quite sure now, because the Antichrist will be loved and appreciated all over the World, and the Pope can't have such a reach, although he's trying. The Antichrist will unite all religions and bring World peace. Except for the Eastern Orthodoxy, because we believe we are the only right Church and the World should be united through the Eastern Orthodoxy, that is why the Eastern Orthodox Church will be condemned and persecuted by the Antichrist.

[T Hunt]

Yes. But there is only one Communion, one Body of Christ, one Church. So, one Church is the right one, one Communion is the right one.

That doesn't mean nobody else outside the Church can't have God's blessing or can't be in some kind of contact with Jesus, but if we speak about the Church and the Communion, only one is the right one, and all others are false.

But where is that in the bible? The bible actually says, whereever 2 or 3 come together in my name, there I am with them. It never says there is only one communion or only one physical church body. In fact the early church seemed to encourage individual churches to take care of themselves yet stay in fellowship.

Only God knows who is going to Heaven, we as people can't know, we can only guess or assume, but we can't know.

Correct, only God sees the heart, but we have to try to glean the heart from the actions and attitudes of a person. There are clues...

And then, there is only one baptism which is right, and it is in one Church which is right.

Again, Im not seeing that in the bible....

Protestants tend to see Christianity as an ideology, and then they discuss who got it right and who got it wrong. That is why there are so many denominations, because everyone believed they got it better than the previous one. But we in Eastern Orthodoxy follow the apostolic succession instead, it is the historical connection to historical Jesus, and although we don't know if he explicitly claimed "the visible Church would continue in an unbroken line", it naturally happened through the apostolic succession, and we highly appreciate it and call it holy. The hand of my priest is the hand of Jesus, through the apostolic succession. It is such an unimaginable holiness, above any discussion on who is right and who is wrong. It is such a holiness to receive the Body of Christ from Christ's hand during the Holy Communion because of the apostolic succession that everything else falls miles below.

I dont think you can claim the orthodox church comes from an unbroken line. I dont think thats historically accurate.

The New Testament is just one of the writings of the Church, but there are also many other writings of the Church as well. The gospels are just the Oral Tradition of the Church that was written down at some point. Sola Scriptura is a pure fantasy, it was never like that, but there was the Oral Tradition which left after Jesus, and many decades later some of it was written down. It is also a great misconception which some have that Christianity was based on the Book, that it is a religion of the Book - because Christianity was first, and the Book came after. So the Book was based on Christianity. Saint Peter didn't have the New Testament. Saint Paul didn't have the New Testament. But they had the Oral Tradition and the Church.

The only word of God in existence is the Bible. We are to take nothing away from it and add nothing too it. It was brought to us as is by God. Gods people didnt always have all of it, but the truths of both are present in both. Gods word has never altered and has always been the same, never contradictory.

I thought it as well, but I am not quite sure now, because the Antichrist will be loved and appreciated all over the World, and the Pope can't have such a reach, although he's trying. The Antichrist will unite all religions and bring World peace.

Ive heard it said there are many antichrists, and the one you are referring too will be the final one. Def not the current pope. I think the end times are along way off and we are about to enter a new golden age.

[/quote]Except for the Eastern Orthodoxy, because we believe we are the only right Church and the World should be united through the Eastern Orthodoxy, that is why the Eastern Orthodox Church will be condemned and persecuted by the Antichrist.[/quote]
Im just not seeing where you are getting that from...

[milos]

But where is that in the bible? The bible actually says, whereever 2 or 3 come together in my name, there I am with them. It never says there is only one communion or only one physical church body. In fact the early church seemed to encourage individual churches to take care of themselves yet stay in fellowship.

The only word of God in existence is the Bible. We are to take nothing away from it and add nothing too it. It was brought to us as is by God. Gods people didnt always have all of it, but the truths of both are present in both. Gods word has never altered and has always been the same, never contradictory.

You are still writing like Christianity was based upon the Bible, while actually the Christian Bible was based upon Christianity. First there was one Church and one Communion, and then that Church wrote the New Testament. Whenever you are referring to the New Testament, you are referring to a Church document. And it is not the only Church document, although it is the main one. For example, our Patriarch traditionally writes an epistle on Easter and on Christmas each year reminding us of what these holidays mean and also addressing some current spiritual issues, similarly to what the apostles did in their epistles.

You got Sola Scriptura from Martin Luther who was not even a priest, because Roman Catholics are not the Church since 1054.

True there are individual Churches that are taking care of themselves and yet staying in fellowship, it is called catholicism in Eastern Orthodoxy, meaning each diocese is full and complete Church with a Bishop, and all Bishops are equal to each other. Several dioceses are grouped into autocephalous Churches with a Patriarch or an Archbishop, and all of them are full and complete Church and equal to each other, with Jesus Christ as both God and High Priest, it is the territorial organization of One Holy Catholic Apostolic Orthodox Church (Eastern Orthodox Church) from the very begining of Christianity.

Im just not seeing where you are getting that from...

Maybe from this.

We believe so, since the Eastern Orthodox Church is the home of Jesus on Earth. We are not allowed to pray together with any others calling themselves Church or denomination or religion or spiritual teaching. The Antichrist will accuse us of breaking the World peace and unity by our religious exceptionalism and not accepting of others. Maybe there are some other religions like Islam that also look intolerant toward others, but they will be used by the Antichrist, like current Muslim migration into Europe is used.

[T Hunt]

You are still writing like Christianity was based upon the Bible, while actually the Christian Bible was based upon Christianity. First there was one Church and one Communion, and then that Church wrote the New Testament. Whenever you are referring to the New Testament, you are referring to a Church document. And it is not the only Church document, although it is the main one. For example, our Patriarch traditionally writes an epistle on Easter and on Christmas each year reminding us of what these holidays mean and also addressing some current spiritual issues, similarly to what the apostles did in their epistles.

You got Sola Scriptura from Martin Luther who was not even a priest, because Roman Catholics are not the Church since 1054.

True there are individual Churches that are taking care of themselves and yet staying in fellowship, it is called catholicism in Eastern Orthodoxy, meaning each diocese is full and complete Church with a Bishop, and all Bishops are equal to each other. Several dioceses are grouped into autocephalous Churches with a Patriarch or an Archbishop, and all of them are full and complete Church and equal to each other, with Jesus Christ as both God and High Priest, it is the territorial organization of One Holy Catholic Apostolic Orthodox Church (Eastern Orthodox Church) from the very begining of Christianity.

Maybe from this.

We believe so, since the Eastern Orthodox Church is the home of Jesus on Earth. We are not allowed to pray together with any others calling themselves Church or denomination or religion or spiritual teaching. The Antichrist will accuse us of breaking the World peace and unity by our religious exceptionalism and not accepting of others. Maybe there are some other religions like Islam that also look intolerant toward others, but they will be used by the Antichrist, like current Muslim migration into Europe is used.

That first sentence there exposes you completely.

The reality is that the bible, old and new testaments, are the infallible words of God himself. We can never add to them or take away. The bible is PERFECT, it has no contradictions or factual errors.

You seem to be trying to add to the word of God, which corrupts it. It seems like the orthodox needs a reformation as well to get mans law out of the church.

I really hope the whole orthodox church isnt that corrupt. I hope they stick to the bible, for the sake of their souls.

[milos]

That first sentence there exposes you completely.

The reality is that the bible, old and new testaments, are the infallible words of God himself. We can never add to them or take away. The bible is PERFECT, it has no contradictions or factual errors.

You seem to be trying to add to the word of God, which corrupts it. It seems like the orthodox needs a reformation as well to get mans law out of the church.

I really hope the whole orthodox church isnt that corrupt. I hope they stick to the bible, for the sake of their souls.

I am just trying to explain you the fact that the Orthodox Church wrote and approved the New Testament, it was inspired by Christ's life and teaching, but men wrote it, and men wrote more documents inspired by Christ's life and teaching not just the New Testament. First there was the Church, and then the Church wrote and approved the New Testament, it is a historical fact not my opinion. The Bible is not the source for Christianity, but Christianity is the source for the Christian Bible.

Maybe this short video would help.

You got Sola Scriptura from a man called Martin Luther who was not even a priest because the Roman Catholics were not the Church since 1054. And then he who was an ordinary man and not part of clergy reformed what? He reformed something that was not the Church, it was Reformation of nothing. It was a plain demonic deception, that he who was nobody reformed nothing, and now people believe in what he did. He replaced the Pope with the Bible, and now the Bible became infallible instead of the Pope, but both are wrong, because only God himself is infallible.

Jesus Christ, Son of God, he is the Word of God, he is God's Logos, and not the Bible, the Bible is just a book.

Even the Satan belives Jesus Christ is the Lord and the Savior, just believing that can't save anyone. There is much more to one's salvation, it is a constant struggle, that we live a Christian life in every moment, but we can't be perfect even then, and not even think for a moment that we are saved. Like in the Divine Liturgy the priest says, preparing the Holy Communion: "The Holy Gifts for the holy people of God.", and the people reply: "One is Holy, one is Lord, Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the Father. Amen." So we need the Eucharist in order to become the Body of Christ and receive Christ's holiness.

Another good video, about the salvation.

[T Hunt]

I am just trying to explain you the fact that the Orthodox Church wrote and approved the New Testament, it was inspired by Christ's life and teaching, but men wrote it, and men wrote more documents inspired by Christ's life and teaching not just the New Testament. First there was the Church, and then the Church wrote and approved the New Testament, it is a historical fact not my opinion. The Bible is not the source for Christianity, but Christianity is the source for the Christian Bible.

Maybe this short video would help.

You got Sola Scriptura from a man called Martin Luther who was not even a priest because the Roman Catholics were not the Church since 1054. And then he who was an ordinary man and not part of clergy reformed what? He reformed something that was not the Church, it was Reformation of nothing. It was a plain demonic deception, that he who was nobody reformed nothing, and now people believe in what he did. He replaced the Pope with the Bible, and now the Bible became infallible instead of the Pope, but both are wrong, because only God himself is infallible.

Jesus Christ, Son of God, he is the Word of God, he is God's Logos, and not the Bible, the Bible is just a book.

Even the Satan belives Jesus Christ is the Lord and the Savior, just believing that can't save anyone. There is much more to one's salvation, it is a constant struggle, that we live a Christian life in every moment, but we can't be perfect even then, and not even think for a moment that we are saved. Like in the Divine Liturgy the priest says, preparing the Holy Communion: "The Holy Gifts for the holy people of God.", and the people reply: "One is Holy, one is Lord, Jesus Christ, to the glory of God the Father. Amen." So we need the Eucharist in order to become the Body of Christ and receive Christ's holiness.

Another good video, about the salvation.

No the bible are the words of God, both the old and the new. Men carried by the holy spirit wrote Gods words onto paper and passed them down. If you throw out the new as fallible you have to throw out the old testament as well.

[milos]

No the bible are the words of God, both the old and the new. Men carried by the holy spirit wrote Gods words onto paper and passed them down. If you throw out the new as fallible you have to throw out the old testament as well.

In Eastern Orthodoxy there is no concept of "infallible" or "fallible" man or book. Only God is perfect and infallible, men or books are just God's creations, we won't call them "infallible" or "fallible", they are just what they are, and what they are meant to be, and that is enough.

Surely and with no doubt both the Old and the New Testament were guided by the Holy Spirit. But your idea of "infallible Bible" comes from the idea of "infallible Pope". The Catholics have replaced Jesus with the Pope, and then the Protestants have replaced the Pope with the Bible.

But the Orthodox still say that only Jesus matters. We want to be the Body of Christ, and that is why the Holy Communion got the most important place in the Orthodox Church. The New Testament was originally written for the liturgical purposes to be read during Church services, it was not meant to be read and understood individually. It was only the invention of the printing press that made the Bible available for individual use, before that books were very rare and expensive, villages and towns usually had only one Bible which was in the church and it was read to the people during Church services. And historically most people were illiterate anyways, millions of Christians who lived and died on Earth have never read the Bible in their entire life, but they were still Christians, and many of them were probably saved. So that idea of the Bible as the main point in Christianity came only recently with the modern technology.

[T Hunt]

In Eastern Orthodoxy there is no concept of "infallible" or "fallible" man or book. Only God is perfect and infallible, men or books are just God's creations, we won't call them "infallible" or "fallible", they are just what they are, and what they are meant to be, and that is enough.

But all of Gods created all his creations perfect. The bible is Gods creation also and since the bible itself cant sin like man can, it is still perfect. There is no contradictions or factual fallacies in the bible anywhere.

Surely and with no doubt both the Old and the New Testament were guided by the Holy Spirit. But your idea of "infallible Bible" comes from the idea of "infallible Pope". The Catholics have replaced Jesus with the Pope, and then the Protestants have replaced the Pope with the Bible.

I agree about the catholics putting the pope before God. But The pope had NO part in the creation of the bible. The bible was infallible LONG before the idea of the pope speaking the words of God came about.

But the Orthodox still say that only Jesus matters. We want to be the Body of Christ, and that is why the Holy Communion got the most important place in the Orthodox Church. The New Testament was originally written for the liturgical purposes to be read during Church services, it was not meant to be read and understood individually. It was only the invention of the printing press that made the Bible available for individual use, before that books were very rare and expensive, villages and towns usually had only one Bible which was in the church and it was read to the people during Church services. And historically most people were illiterate anyways, millions of Christians who lived and died on Earth have never read the Bible in their entire life, but they were still Christians, and many of them were probably saved. So that idea of the Bible as the main point in Christianity came only recently with the modern technology.

Disagree about the bible but see above.

Maybe you can tell me. How do orthodox handle communion? Like the mechanics. At what age do you start taking communion? Do you have to get confirmed first? Does the orthodox see it as pure bread and wine, pure body and blood, or a mix between the two? And how often do you take it?

Honestly ive never seen orthodox here in america anywhere so I know mostly about other denominations. Im learning the most I know about orthodox from what you are telling me in this thread.

[Solars Toy]

Just an interesting thought...

Jesus did not die to start a religion.  "We" created a religion out of His death.

He died to start a relationship....

How is your relationship with Him?

[Possum]

Just an interesting thought...

Jesus did not die to start a religion.  "We" created a religion out of His death.

He died to start a relationship....

How is your relationship with Him?

Beautiful.