this is the most accurate meme I’ve ever seen

>>18405557
Most Orthodox Christians I've met barely know anything about Christianity. And I'm not talking theology or church history, but basic shit like knowing the Ten Commandments. They really seem to live off of vibes & aesthetics more than anything else, even worse than Catholics.

>>18405557
Can someone explain the "uneducated clergy" in Orthodoxy to me?

File: south korean christians h(...).jpg (126 KB, 681x1024)

126 KB JPG

>>18405575
that's good though, it means they ingest less of the poison that is Christianity, and unlike Evangelicals they don't fall victim to Zionists because those give off bad vibes

>>18405577
Actual orthodox believers are monks in monasteries, being a priest is a job otherwise and its a hilbilly job to boot.

>>18405577
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kourbania
Orthodox priests literally sacrifice animals to dead saints (it’s just veneration though)

>>18405582
Jews do that too, its a pretty old Abrahamic ritual. In fact, there are bible verses featuring it.

>>18405583
Jews offer sacrifices to creatures? No there certainly are no bible verses featuring that, unless you mean descriptions of pagans. The Greek practice is obviously continued from pre-Christian pagans in any event.

>>18405588
Its not a sacrifice to creatures, its sacrificing creatures to God.

>>18405589
>offerings to saints.
>The practice involves the blood sacrifice (θυσία, thusia) of a domestic animal to either a saint, taken as the tutelary of the village in question, or dedicated to the Holy Trinity or the Virgin.

>>18405578
>my dad made me go to mass so resent him for it.

>>18405592
Its offered to God, not to saints. Its offered on holy days, named after martyrs.

>>18405605
Imagine having to wake up on Sunday just so that some old dude can collect money for his private jet and tell you how goyim like you are subhumans.

>>18405608
The sacrifices are dedicated to saints, offered before their images. The saint is not a coincidence either to the sacrifice or to the pretended holy day. They are the objects of idolatrous worship.

>>18405557
Im not comfortable with this "protestant" label as this would include mormons and other freaks. Its just Lutheranism.

>evangelicals totally aren't protestant yuo guise, cause they did the same thing we did only this time its le bad for reasons

lmao

>>18405625
>Im not comfortable with this "protestant" label as this would include mormons and other freaks
Since when?
>Its just Lutheranism.
And Calvinism

>>18405632
What’s “the same thing we did”, chief?

anyways, if evangelicals aren't protestant than protestants aren't Nicene Christians

evangelicals claim to be protestant, but are not
protestants claim to be Nicene Christians, but are not

simple as
both split away from their respective claims to form their own counter-churches

whereas the truly Nicene actually existed jurisdictionally before mutually excommunicating one another over petty differences and Byzantine politics, so they still qualify even if they are visibly separated

>>18405557
Yeah Orthodox priests are genuinely retarded. At least Catholics know how to defend their ahistorical doctrine with logic and invocations of development of doctrine. Orthodox priests either deny that the source they use to get their doctrine from are provable forgeries/interpolations or (at least in the US) they will straight up deny Orthodox doctrine and say they don't believe those doctrines. I remember going to a Greek Orthodox church in the US and the priest who worked there; said that I don't have to bow down to images and that Orthodox theology doesn't require One to kiss or prostrate to images (even though this contradicts the false ecumenical Council of Nicaea 2, which Orthodox practitioners must dogmatically believe in).

>18405646
*yawn* get better bait

>>18405633
>And Calvinism
Who?

>>18405635
Getting excommunicated does not give you the right to start your own church.

It was not true of Arius, and it was not true of Luther either.
Who in fact publicly burned the canon law along with the papal document warning him that if he did not stop teaching error he would be excommunicated, in a flagrantly disrespectful act of defiance and a total break from and rejection the past. Arius at least, knew he had no right to start a counter church and instead his followers focused on changing the church from within.

From that day forward, every historical protestant church is defined through this primordial act of division and artificial establishment of an entirely separate and completely new institution. And this is demonstrated by the fruit of endless division that characterizes protestant history. As Jesus said, he who does not gather with me scatters abroad.

I'll give the Anabaptists a break though, they seem really cool and definitely chilled out since the beginning when they were absolutely not chill. They never really did real damage to the church.
Just them though.

>>18405623
That's just wrong. The sacrifices are to god.

File: Screenshot 2026-03-26 223225.png (85 KB, 868x724)

85 KB PNG

my dad literally buys a lamb on the day he almost dies, and has the priest kill it and then we cook it, as a thanks to god that he didn't die in a truck crash

then again, orthodox priests are literally just village shamen

>>18405664
I predicted your response would be falsehood either about sola scriptura or the Reformation, and here we are.

The church of Rome is not the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church is not an institution. The Church which Jesus founded is the assembly of all believers in all times and places. The Antichrist pope of Rome had no authority to excommunicate Luther, 1. Because he receives his authority not from God but from the dragon, 2. Because even if he were still the bishop of Rome he would not have jurisdiction over a monk in Germany. And even if the process of the excommunication were lawful, the excommunication itself was not, since Luther was excommunicated for holding fast to the truth of the gospel. Am I to blaspheme God and praise the devil if the pope orders me to? Not only was he free to disobey the pope and scrape of the crust of human and diabolical invention which had crept in over many centuries, he was required to so as his duty before God as a minister of the word and sacrament.

Our churches are not schismatic simply for existing, in most cases the several churches around the world exist as distinct institutions for merely historical reasons. For instance, there is a Dutch church in America and a Presbyterian church because the former came from the Netherlands and the latter from Scotland, and not because there is any division and divisiveness between them. And the many different evangelical churches hardly have anything to do with us and they have little connection to the Reformation, but there is this much in common, like us they are not the deceived slaves of the pope like you are, I grant that. The unity of the Church is spiritual, and not institutional. Nor are we schismatic for separating from you, since the cause of the schism is not our separation but the heretical and schismatic religion of the modern church of Rome which makes the separation necessary.

>>18405783
You aren't schismatic, because you never actually belonged to the apostolic church at all.
You be in schism, you have to have possesses apostolic succession. Which mere possibility you reject outright.

Rather, Calvin and Luther created counter churches of whole cloth. And in the case of Luther, immediately whored out to the state. And in Calvin's he merely set himself up as the pope of Geneva.
It is striking that these "reformers" (in truth counterfeiters) could not agree with one another about the very elemental basics considering the sacraments. Which means that rather than being guided by the spirit, they were contesting with one another based on their personal opinions. Each considered himself to be a personal magisterium.

These "churches" as you call them are something that literally not a single *bishop* who was invited to the council of Nicaea, because they each had apostolic succession, would recognize as being part of the same one holy catholic and apostolic church to which they belonged visibly and for which they issued a binding decision for all the faithful worldwide down through the ages.

>if the process of the excommunication were lawful, the excommunication itself was not
You don't understand the law.

An excommunication can be unjust, or wrong.
But it is still legally binding.
Just as a man can be convicted of a crime he did not commit.
Nobody would say the ruling was illegal.

Again, you did not schism. You belong to a wholly counterfeit church, so that would be impossible.
The church is not interested in union with this lie, as they are with those who ar in genuine schism, only the taking out of deceived individuals from it. Whereas complete reunification with the eastern autocephalous churches is most desired.

>>18405838
This entire post is an example of the begging the question fallacy, because every point and argument made is contingent on the claims of Rome being true. There is no apostolic succession of priests and bishops, the Roman church is not apostolic, and Luther and Calvin did not create brand new churches. All that remains of your post is empty simpleminded rhetoric. It is ever the case that the only way to defend and persist in Romanism is to not dare for one moment to question it. It cannot survive a moment of scrutiny.

Apostolic succession as you picture it is a fiction. There were no prelates and no priests in the apostolic age, so obviously these offices cannot “succeed” them. When you criticize us for abolishing these human innovations you criticize us only for setting aside the traditions of men for the commandments of God. That is fine, you may have your human religion, we will have to content ourselves with God’s revelation.

Luther and Calvin reformed their churches by the word of God. The church did not suddenly spring into being, what happened suddenly was its purification. Their authority to reform the Church cannot be denied, since they were ordained under the papacy or ordained by men ordained under the papacy (and so on), so you cannot deny their authority without denying your own. The Reformation was the proper exercise of legitimate ecclesiastical authority. The only disagreement about the sacraments they had was the mode of real presence in the Lord’s supper, which was a regrettable schism, but it is to be blamed on men and not God. Meanwhile, priests in good standing with the pope openly labor for the “right” to commit sodomy.

The Nicene Creed is of binding authority, not because it came from the Nicene council, but because it represents the word of God. For this reason we are to reject councils whose binding precepts require us to deny essential dogma, such as Trent. The exc was unlawful because it was against Christ.

>>18405852
It's not the claim of Rome alone. Every eastern autocephalous church also claims apostolic succession with the exact same understanding of what it means and the mode of it's transmission.

>Luther and Calvin did not create brand new churches.
Yes, they did. Manifestly.
They might have claimed to be merely "reforming", but in truth they were just creating counter churches.
What really proves this is they simply couldn't reconcile their two artificially manmade "churches".

>apostolic succession is fiction
Then why were the bishops who authored the Nicene Creed invited to an ecumenical council?

They clearly recognized one another as belonging to the same visible church and together being able to agree authoritatively on matters of faith because of their mutual apostolicity which is the product of an unbroken line of ordination. This is why gnostics and their like weren't invited, they weren't legitimately in the apostolic line.

>word of God
oh, so you're the one who abandoned the other thread after confusing the letter for the spirit

>they were ordained under the papacy or ordained by men ordained under the papacy (and so on), so you cannot deny their authority without denying your own.
This is a laughably naive mistake that I have seen many protties make, not understanding the first thing about this mode of governance common to both east and west since well before Nicaea.

Priests do not have the authority to ordain other priests.
Only bishops can do that.
Priests are empowered to administer the sacraments, except that of ordination.

Priests have authority over their particular congregation, but cannot overrule other priests or encroach on them. This principle of regulation requires the office of bishop, and was recognized by every member of the council of Nicea.

Your rejection of this regulative discipline is not the only thing that allows people to identify you as not being truly Nicene, but it is up there.
You merely LARP Nicene Christianity.

yes, Luther had all the same authority that Arius did
crazy right, Arius was also a priest
both critically mislead vast numbers of people and were rightfully excommunicated for it, and both instigated enormous crises for the church the repercussions of which last to this very day

this thread right here btw
>>18395178

which hit the bottom of the catalogue, and I think was autosaged
it's funny that you probably got mods running damage control for your confusion btw
those are really not the types you want on your side you know
the people who run this site aren't exactly well known for being upright, and the absolute state of this board speaks to the personal quality of its moderators

still, if we were to accept your strange conclusion about the validity of a church being dependent on the virtues of its ministers, it would follow that since this board and site has been afflicted by trash moderation that actually those mods and jannies don't have any real authority and cannot actually prune or sticky threads, issue bans, etc

maybe as an analogy this is a stretch, and some might consider it sacrilege, but there is a temporal comparison to make between mods/jannies and bishops/priests even if there is no comparing 4chan and the Nicene church

being a janny doesn't mean you can ban people, and being a shit mod doesn't mean you suddenly don't have all the regular powers and responsibilities that comes with that position

do we need better jannies and mods
sure, it would be important to the health of this site, but that doesn't mean we should not have any whatsoever
things would get out of hand very quickly

can a mod ban you for no good reason whatsoever
yes

does that mean you suddenly aren't banned
no

>>18405878
>Every eastern autocephalous church also claims apostolic succession with the exact same understanding of what it means and the mode of it's transmission.
No, not at all the same. They do not believe the same things about prelates and priests that you do, so their conception of “succession” cannot be the same either.
>Yes, they did. Manifestly.
No, they didn’t. Those churches were there before them, but not yet reformed.
>Then why were the bishops who authored the Nicene Creed invited to an ecumenical council?
The question is anachronistic, there was no such thing as an “ecumenical council” until Nicaea. What they were doing was not established and only had comparison with Jerusalem, which was called by and presided over by the apostles themselves.
>They clearly recognized one another as belonging to the same visible church
And they were. The visible Church consists of all who profess Christ and their children. They also were the same institutional church as each other, but they were not the same institutional church as every church in the world, as the churches outside the empire from Persia to China had no institutional relation to them.
>being able to agree authoritatively on matters of faith because of their mutual apostolicity which is the product of an unbroken line of ordination
Completely anachronistic. Was the Arian council of Ariminum therefore authoritative as well?
>This is why gnostics and their like weren't invited, they weren't legitimately in the apostolic line.
They weren’t invited because they were heretics.
>oh, so you're the one who abandoned the other thread after confusing the letter for the spirit
I didn’t abandon anything, but I take it you’re the faithless papist who denies the inspiration of scripture.
(cont.)

>>18405878
>Priests do not have the authority to ordain other priests.
>Only bishops can do that.
The distinction of priest and bishop is an invention of men’s brains which was not instituted by Christ. It is found nowhere in the New Testament, which recognizes only the offices of elders and deacons. Therefore, no special authority can belong to the bishops, since none was bestowed on them from Christ. All ecclesiastical acts of the reformers were therefore valid exercises of authority invested in them as elders by Christ, both to reform the church and to ordain additional elders.
>You merely LARP Nicene Christianity.
Not a single member of the Nicene council would recognize your apostate church.
>>18405891
>you probably got mods running damage control for you
Take your meds, Juan
>your strange conclusion about the validity of a church being dependent on the virtues of its ministers
Did you also hallucinate me saying this when you hallucinated me bribing the mods?
>>18405903
You cannot be excommunicated for standing for the truth of Christ against heresy and sin. Such an excommunication is absolutely null and utterly void.

>>18405654
They look like Lutherans, but they are actually robots who have been coded to not believe in agency/free will.

does being a mod mean you are also the admin
no

does the admin get to decide who becomes a mod, or simply delegate that authority to the decision of a team of mods
yes

if I decide I don't like the mods or the admin and create my own chan, is that the same site as 4chan
no

if someone else who uses my own personal fakechan decides they don't like me, and then make their own newchan without my permission in an attempt to further split the userbase between multiple competing platforms, does this look like protestantism yet
yes

>>18405557
Who makes this crap up?

>>18405912
>me bribing the mods

your words, not mine
buying your position as moderator isn't a sin like that thing Simon attempted to do

>no special authority can belong to the bishops
Tell that to the bishops at Nicaea. I'll wait.
Oh right you can't, you can only tell that to the people who inherited that office from them.

But since they'll tell you you're wrong, you disregard what they have to say.

File: 701669.jpg (35 KB, 365x450)

35 KB JPG

>>18405918
Like this guy?

>>18405937
I would disregard what they would have to say about this because it is unbiblical (assuming they would not have agreed with Jerome about this).

>>18405557
Now post the delusion levels

>>18405943
Then Nicaea is unbiblical. Since it was a binding act made through their collective authority, which you say is empty.
You say, that Arius had the exact same authority as the score of bishops who condemned his heresy for what it is.

Like I said, you don't actually believe in the same things about the church that this ecumenical council clearly did.
They could have never dreamed that someone like you could come along one day after more than a thousand years and deny everything that they took for granted would never be disputed because it had been commonly understood for generations by all who attended that very same council.

>>18405952
>Then Nicaea is unbiblical. Since it was a binding act made through their collective authority, which you say is empty.
1. It is not empty, it is ministerial 2. Nicaea is binding because the Creed cannot be rejected without rejecting the God of scripture
>you don't actually believe in the same things about the church that this ecumenical council clearly did
Could you tell me the name of a single member of this council who believed in the bodily assumption of Mary?

starting a new church is not like simply purchasing a domain name, and then copy pasting the chan netcode

if it were as easy as buying some land and trademarking a new bible sounding name (which involves submission of your ministry to the regulation of the state, extremely dangerous spiritually) and then merely reading from the bible to people, you'd have most prottie churches that exist

Christ's church isn't for sale, it's not a free market where we compete to see whose different kind of worship is most popular

your particular ministry needs to have an apostolic blessing to be legitimate, that is to say you must be apostolically sent in the same mode in which the Father sends the Son and Jesus sent his apostles
because since the apostles are sent in the same mode as the Son, because he sent them with that same authority received from the Father, it follows that they reiterated this pattern and likewise sent others in turn to carry on the same mission Jesus originally gave them to carry out for the sake of the whole world

>>18405557
So evangelicals aren't counted as protestants....because???

>>18405557
The average Catholic seriously doesn't know a single damn thing about their own religion. Ask a Catholic the purpose of the eucharist and you'll just get an NPC stare. Catholicism is very much a cultural religion, where you go to church on Sunday's just because. You zone out for an hour, take communion in a state of mortal sin, then rush out the door at the earliest opportunity. I can't think of any other religion where its followers are as ignorant of their own beliefs as Catholicism.

Evangelicals may be annoying as fuck but at least they tend to know their own beliefs.

>>18405650
>Zion

>>18405954
>the bodily assumption of Mary
Neat deflection.

Instead of addressing the point about how the council of Nicaea clearly understood the true apostolicity of the visible church which had visibly gathered in one place to resolve a particularly visible temporal dispute on spiritual matters through a visible document which all visible members of the church were henceforth expected to profess, understood in a way that is obviously incompatible with your own heretical misconceptions, and that the apostolic church in the east AND west *universally* has this same exact ancient understanding even if they are in schism, you decide to distract from the topic at hand to something irrelevant.

Of course, this visibility of the church does not preclude it's invisible aspect.
As it is written in the Creed, visible and invisible.

>>18405557
>Separating 'protestantism' without any extra qualification from 'evangelicalism'.
If you were at least specifying Anglicanism, Lutheranism, Reformed Churches, or something I would get it (even if I don't think it's really true, the laity is never actually very religiously educated at all). But this way it just seems like a Baptist or some other munchkin trying to build a distinction without a difference.

And anyway. My hot take is that the three branches of Post-chalcedonian Christianity are all have a main 'vice' that manifests in too lax conditions. All relating to Christianity's relationship with the Old Testament.
Protestants tend towards Judaizing (embrace of the old testament).
The Orthodox towards what is essentially gnosticism.
And Catholics used to side-step this issue through making scripture obscure and inaccesible. With the side effect that the laity fills the hole with the third vice: Paganism.

>>18406001
>Neat deflection
Nice cope.

You make a big deal of the beliefs of the Nicene fathers, and then you can’t show a single one of them who believed what you are dogmatically required to believe. And it does speak directly to this subject, because the appearance of this medieval mythology that you are required to believe of which all of them were ignorant demonstrates that not one present would have understood your notions of authority nor have dared to believe that they had the authority to bind the conscience or invent dogma. Your appeal to them is a farce, your Church is not theirs.

The council being visible isn’t relevant and I don’t understand why you think it is. It was a council of validly ordained ministers of the Church, which produced a Creed which was pressing in a controversy at the time and is authoritative over the Church not because they made it, but because it represents the teaching of scripture. In this sense the Nicene Creed stands on the same ground as the Westminster Confession. The authority of the Creed is the authority of scripture.

>>18405557
God speak through me tho

>>18406021
This meme is made by some content creator called Redeemed Zoomer from the mainline PCUSA denomination. His definition of evangelical is some arbitrary definition where it's Protestants he doesn't like. If you look at one of his videos, its mostly about how mainline Protestants used to have so much influence in American society and now its gone because of liberalism and "schismatic" conservatives leaving said theological liberal mainline denominations. For example, he argues that the English separatists didn't actively try to separate from the Church of England and that's why it's okay for them to schism but not theological conservatives from the PCUSA. Basically in the perspective of Redeemed Zoomer, an evangelical only really applies to Baptists, Pentecostals and non-denominationals (who are usually basically Baptists or Pentecostals in beliefs).

The thing with evangelicalism is that it's just a subset of Protestantism that occupies between the liberal mainline "Jesus supports Gay Marriage and Abortions" vs Bible-thumping fundamentalists who want to separate from society.

>>18406056
>the Nicene Creed stands on the same ground as the Westminster Confession
what enormous hubris

this heretic's profession is nothing at all like the Nicene Creed, either in its applicational scope or in the succinct power of it's central message
it isn't universally binding, for one, and it couldn't claim to be either because it was commissioned by the parliament of England to formally regulate the worship of a particular national state church rather than *the* one holy catholic and apostolic church

comparing this to Nicaea is a ridiculous farce, it's actually a slap in the face to the collective witness of antiquity
moreover, none of these so called "divines" were validly ordained either

this isn't the presby Nicaea, trying to compare the two is actually embarrassing because it demonstrates very clearly that they had absolutely none of the same kind of supranational authority that the Nicene council exercised on the behalf of the entire apostolic church
think I'll rely on this tack more in the future, the stark contrast between these two is actually quite telling

>>18405575
This is unironically the correct way of being Christian. It's all about cosmic intuition, God ascribed laws into our flesh and soul, vibes, looks and sounds cool, not "of the world", iconography, etc
It's not through any of our merit that we're Christian, it's not because of any education or philosophy or grand journey or intellect or strength of our being. It's all the Holy Ghost working in us.
We actually don't care about the worldly aspect of Christianity, we only care to be saved.

>>18405577
Like the other anon said, there is a stark and noticeable difference between "ortodoxia de mir" (your basic orthodox churches, churchgoers, the priests, the customs, most don't even fast or pray daily, etc) and monastic orthodoxy, with it's monks and their "rânduieli" (arrangements/rules). It's like two different religions based on the same canonical texts.

read the actual canons of First Nicaea
it's not the holy catholic and apostolic church, but only invisible and referred to in the sense of a belief alone

rather that it is clearly the same body which legally anathamatises the Arians

"And those who say
“there once was when he was not”, and “before he was begotten he was not”, and that
he came to be from
things that were not, or
from another hypostasis [Gr. hypostaseos] or substance [Gr. ousias, Lat. substantia],
affirming that the Son of God is subject to change or alteration these the catholic and apostolic church anathematises."

>the catholic and apostolic church anathematises
this acts clearly indicates that the catholic and apostolic church they are referring to, is represented by them through the virtue of their office

"The ancient customs of Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis shall be maintained, according to which the bishop of Alexandria has authority over all these places since a similar custom exists with reference to the bishop of Rome. Similarly in Antioch and the other provinces the prerogatives of the churches are to be preserved. In general the following principle is evident: if anyone is made bishop without the consent of the metropolitan, this great synod determines that such a one shall not be a bishop. If however two or three by reason of personal rivalry dissent from the common vote of all, provided it is reasonable and in accordance with the church’s canon, the vote of the majority shall prevail."


Is this "reformed" ecclesial polity on display?
No, it demonstrates clear episcopal hierarchy.

>>18405989
Evangelicals aren't even Christians

>>18406056
Alan, is that you?

>>18405557
Evangelicals are not Christians, they are jews worshippers

>>18405578
Serbia and Greece are turbo zionist shitholes

>>18405557
I wish RZ's version of Protestantism existed IRL

>>18406210
Stop whining.

It is universally binding in the same sense Nicaea is, i.e. it is authoritative because it represents scripture. In a material, institutional sense Nicaea was binding on nobody beyond the empire. The Westminster Confession was not merely intended to be a single state church’s statement of faith but a mature confession of the Reformed faith and summary of scripture, which is why it was immediately adopted in Scotland as well.

The actual hubris is coming from the one who places his church and its god-king in the place of God and arrogates to them authority which could only belong to God alone.
>>18406274
>is represented by them through the virtue of their office
No, it is represented by them through the virtue of the council. None of them would claim their office gives them authority over the whole Catholic Church, not even the bishop of Rome claimed this yet.
>Is this "reformed" ecclesial polity on display?
What is far more relevant than the uncontroversial fact man-made offices had already appeared and predominated by this point in history is that it is not papist ecclesiology. This canon directly contradicts papal supremacy by limiting and restricting the jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome and yet because you lack self-awareness you posted it anyway. It gives jurisdiction over several regions not to Rome but to Alexandria and Antioch, it gives authority over the selections of bishops to the several metropolitans and not to Rome alone, and it gives the majority authority to overrule metropolitans (including Rome) in such cases. There was no papacy in the 4th century, it is not from God.

>>18406678
>It is universally binding in the same sense Nicaea is

You are delusional.
This is a document which belongs to a state church, not the holy catholic and apostolic one testified to at Nicaea. It's regulations are not compatible with the canons of Nicaea or even like them.
Absolutely nothing in the Nicene canons is compatible with your statist heresy, these canons which are still binding on the *true* apostolic faith around the world.

>>18406261
>it's not because of any education or philosophy
Orthodox Christiians are the biggest philbros that you'll find online. They live off of philosophy, because they sure as shit aren't reading the book. They just say "The church fathers and my priest understands the book".

>actually, le westminister confession is just like the Nicene Creed and that's why the civil magistrates of England are authorized by God himself and actually have the duty to suppress false worship by the sword in every country on earth
>you know, since it's clearly universally binding because I said it is even though there were only representatives from a single island there

this is bonkers btw
are these the "educated" protestants
cause that would mean their education is really just a set of rationalizations and mental gymnastics to resolve their cognitive dissonance over rejecting the council of Nicaea

>>18407159
What's so special and divine about the Nicene forum meeting, that makes it incpmparable to other councils?

>>18405688
Bulgaria?
Still can't believe Zamunda got nuked.

>>18405688
>>18407989
I've always been fascinated with how Orthodox Christians have been so chill with pagan practices historically. Even if Russia had a schism over shit like this centuries ago, the ROC today has zero issues whoring out to the state in a manner that would make Catholics & mainline Protestants blush. Although they are a special case, given their current schism with the EP.

>>18408056
Orthodox Churches in theformer USSR sphere (and the catholic church in those places desu, look at Poland) are criminal organizations that work with the biggest criminal organization (the government) for profit and stability.
True christians in eastern Europe are basically all protestants, they just don't know the terminology.

>>18405557
Protestants and evangelicals are the same thing though?

>>18407961
Are you serious?
Do you simply not know what the ecumenical councils are?

Why should I have to explain basic facts to you?
Again, anyone pretending this is emblematic of prot education must be huffing paint. I've never seen anyone claim the various prot confessions have the same weight as an ecumenical council, it's insane puffery and should not have been argued in the first place since it's embarrassing to the entire thought by mere public association.

No. That body convened by parliament to regulate the worship of a single state church over which they claimed authority and strictly dictated the topics in which theological debate was to be wholly limited, was *not* an ecumenical council.
Constantine himself, despite calling for and hosting the council, never imposed himself or his opinion on the proceedings in such a jackbooted impious way as that despicable and unholy parliament truly did.

It was a power play, in truth nothing more than politics (they wanted the Scots on board to help them usurp and kill the king) with a layer of spiritualism layered on top to justify it. Various other prots subsequently adopting it options doesn't mean squat in terms of comparison with the real article.

>>18408088
Its dudes meeting to talk about doctrine. Its nothing divine, there's no prophets, there's no miracle. Its guys talking politics.
Just because it was roman guys, doesn't make it more valid than when american guys do it.

>>18408099
Maybe you weren't aware that the church in Armenia, Persia, and Scythia was represented too. This wasn't a national gathering, because the same catholic church written of in that document by definition isn't defined as a national one.

The westminster assembly is in no way comparable to an ecumenical council of the universal church.
Moreover, none of them had apostolic succession.
That is just a fact. So it doesn't even rise to the level of a local or regional council.

It's ludicrous that you have no understanding of what the ecumenical councils represent to the real church, or what specifically qualified the people who were invites.

We are dudes meeting to talk about doctrine.
That means next to nothing compared to an ecumenical council.

>>18408113
>foreign dudes were there too!
ok
its still just dudes talking

>b-b-b-but they were important dudes! they are important because the body they empowered to say they are important, said they are important
ok
i empower 4chan to say we are important

It's just jewish mythology at the end of the day.

>>18405557
Priests in Serbia an Montenegro were literal druids untill 19th century.

>>18408088
>Do you simply not know what the ecumenical councils are?
Something that didn’t even exist in concept when Nicaea was held.

>>18408694
Explain.

>>18408923
They were ilitarate, they would memorise texts and spew them in church slavonic, but didn't understand what they were saying. Priests participated in traditions like imbeding the oak, sacrifacing pigs for christmas, old burial traditions, you could go to them for dream interpertation, they made health potions, in times of war they would interpert signs, and lead troops into battle(google Luka Lazarevic ,Milo Jovovic, Prota Matija Nenadovic..). Serbs lived like gauls from asterix and obelix untill the 19th century

>>18407989
Here's a tip, it didn't.
Try zamunda dot rip.

File: Screenshot 2026-03-29 144531.png (387 KB, 638x812)

387 KB PNG

>blurring depictions of Yeshua Ha-Nozri
do prots really?

>>18405557
Do protties even believe in God?

>>18408769
So that whole council of Jerusalem thing just wasn't on their minds I guess.

>>18409435
Depictions of the person of God are a violation of the 2nd commandment.

>>18410435
The council of Jerusalem was attended and led by these guys called apostles so every attempt by the unreformed churches to cargo cult it are erroneous

File: 1747829025013009.png (134 KB, 716x735)

134 KB PNG

>>18409435
Most Christians have abandoned the older laws so yes it does make you a muzzie of sorts

>>18410861
Christianity became europenized, removing Levant specific stuff and adding the classical greco-roman philosophy and cosmology. This arguably improved it.

>>18405563
apparently, this is what educated christians do
https://files.catbox.moe/xhtl9i.mp4

>>18405646
Nicene Christianity has barely existed in the West since Nestorius was wrongfully anathematised

Marcionism is more tolerable than normal christianity with all its old testament jewish bullshit. I think most modern christians are some form of mixture of marcionism and arianism.

File: images (20).jpg (54 KB, 551x556)

54 KB JPG

>>18405783
Kick off the drugs man

>>18410861
We choose which still apply based on the revelation of God in the New Testament. The law consists of three parts, moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The first is concerned with strict right and wrong, and has always been binding on all men everywhere, and is summarized in the Ten Commandments. The second consists of religious rites and precepts peculiar to the Jews, which served to prefigure Christ and distinguish the Messianic people from the rest of mankind. These were fulfilled by Christ, and are forbidden to keep today, since in so doing one denies Christ. The third is concerned with righteous governance of a commonwealth by application of the former laws by the state. This applies in part, as the model or foundation from which modern nations are to pursue obedience to God and His blessing. The determination of what laws abide today is determined entirely by categorization within these three groups, and not by our feelings or whatever flaming faggots and middle class white women tell themselves.

>>18411293
>popery moment

File: 1677183471089059.jpg (136 KB, 1280x720)

136 KB JPG

>>18411327
its closer to judaism than anything, and i think can best be summed up by the jewish adage "it was real in my mind"

what part of christ's flesh do they imagine themselves eating?
what is the only piece of flesh that ever left his body?

File: 5C4401CB-A8CA-4636-808A-F(...).png (340 KB, 716x822)

340 KB PNG

I was raised in a totally areligious environment. Nobody ever mentioned religion, except historical mythology. Growing up and seeing people actually believe this shit was totally disorienting. It’s like going outside and being met with millions of people praying to Ra so their sports team will win or some shit.
A lot of people would unironically go insane if they had this experience.

>>18410828
>cargo cult
where were you when "reformed" admitted they don't have the same power from the Holy Spirit that the apostles do, because they aren't really the same catholic and apostolic church of Nicaea which understood itself to be thusly empowered through the laying of hands and hence truly apostolic in the legitimate succession