coldfact

@hihihi46885110 @dmitri_golovin @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David What if both innovated away from the truth? It clearly was divided.

@_coldfact_ @dmitri_golovin @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David Bc Jesus established the Church which cannot be divided. So yes we all have to ask ourselves which is the True church that dates back to Christ. By definition is cannot be protestant

@_coldfact_ @dmitri_golovin @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David Yes to simplify it, you should reduce it to Catholic or Orthodox and discern btwn the two. Those would be the two choices based on their claims. It is true one of them is the True Church. But it def aint protestantism

@hihihi46885110 @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David So you allow yourself the capacity to reject Catholic innovation, but don’t all me the capacity to reject Orthodox innovation? Why is that?

@_coldfact_ @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David Im orthodox exactly bc i reject the pope

Looking forward to my discussion with @Acts17David tomorrow (7:30pm Eastern) on our YouTube live stream, about Eastern Orthodoxy, the gospel, and questions from the chat. Link below 👇

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David They could all be true. Again, I am making no truth claims.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David What if all 20 canons of Nicea are fully supported by both scripture and tradition? Could they be true then?

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Not sure how I can help you with this - I cannot say if something is true or false. How would I know? Best bet would be whether I find something subjectively agreeable to my understanding God or not. Jesus is fully divine as far as I can tell which accords with Nicea 1.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David I’m still trying to figure out if nicea 1 is true or not. That’s only 300ish years after the resurrection. If you say it is false, I’d love to hear your reason so I can join you in professing whatever the truth is.

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Again, no claim I made. Follow all teachings of Christ. It’s a logical leap to go from there to all teachings of the Orthodox or Catholic Churches are the teachings of Christ. You honestly believe that no human innovation has entered the church in thousands of years?

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Which of the teachings of Christ should I reject if I want to follow him correctly?

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David I don’t recall saying that. My position as been clear from the start: Just because I can accept the teachings, doctrine of the church it does not mean I have to accept ALL teachings, doctrine. Whether it is icon veneration, popes, theosis, or whatever. I don’t see it as binary.

I don’t defer to an institution. I defer to Christ, God Himself, through His carefully selected and specially guided teachers. You do too, at least kinda. You say they taught correctly until the apostles died, but then all oral teaching was lost/corrupted and only the writing stayed true. And also, Christ’s appointed teachers forgot what the scripture meant.

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Another straw-man, right? Did I say anywhere my “anything” on the subject was true or perfect? I am just trying to work it out like we all are. But I think our main disagreement is on how much we defer to an institution to tell us what is true.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Except that the scripture and your interpretation of it are perfect, right?

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David I did not say it was false. I can make no truth claim because I have no idea.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David That’s not what faith means. If you don’t have a good reason why Nicea 1 is false, why not agree that it is true?

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David You really should change your X profile description - because apparently you know everything and don’t have questions 😅 I should have it instead! Thanks for the chat.

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David You straw-man too much. Where did I say it was a total mystery? But certainly enough mystery - we are meant to have free will, knowledge, discernment and enough evidence (experiential and otherwise) to choose him. Not precise certainty. Again he could provide that trivially.

@stuck_toilet @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David Because you are making it binary. Why can’t I accept it as true when the canon was put together and yet false in later innovations? How is that illogical? Your insistence that it is true always is not logical or practical (given humans can make mistakes or be led astray).

@_coldfact_ @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David Why do you continue to deflect? One more time, if the church was a false church (per the evangelical criteria) when the canon was put together, then u have zero assurances that u have the true bible. Stop running from basic logic.

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David You tell me - why did Orthodox and Catholic split if the truth was so obviously clear. And actually, beyond that, I don’t think God wants it to be that clear. He wants us to wrestle with faith and choose him. If he wanted 100% clear truth he would arrive in the sky right now.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Wait So God himself, came to earth, did miracles and taught people the truth, just so it would be impossible for you to know the truth? Really?

@stuck_toilet @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David How about the Pope? How about kissing icons? Theosis? Palamism/Hesychasm? You cannot say that early Christians would have arrived at the same places that Orthodox and Catholics did. Just like you reject innovations (the pope?) I can too without rejecting the Bible.

@_coldfact_ @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David So u have to prove to us that when the canon was put together, the Church did not believe in the Real Presence, the veneration of saints, faith and works and pretty much all the things u consider heretical Otherwise, u are admitting that u accepted the bible from a false church

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David What are you not understanding? To remain in the Church and later to remain in the Orthodox or Catholic Churches, there were agreed upon positions. This is not a truth position, it’s a communion one. So Nicea 1 was binding in that respect. True is above my pay grade.

Nicea 1 isn’t controversial either. Everyone who called themselves the Church held to that for 1,500 years. Everyone with a claim to be Christ’s Church founded by Him through the apostles holds to Nicea 1 to this day. But you say Nicea 1 is true and binding or false and not binding?

@stuck_toilet @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David Why couldn’t I? If I accept truth from you while you are a good and honest man, why should I accept it when you have fallen into drugs and crime? It is your bizarre assertion that I must forever accept something from a church.

@_coldfact_ @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David That's not what I asked you. The question is how can you accept anything at all from a corrupt institution? Once more, will you accept a book on morality from the Church of Satan or The Taliban? Yes or no?

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Acts 1 not controversial - full consensus. I don’t get your point… people who disagreed were banished. That does not mean something is definitively true. Just whether the majority will let you hold a belief and stay in communion.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David I’m trying to understand what you’re saying. Is the Acts council valid, ecumenical and binding? Is Nicea 1 valid ecumenical and binding? If one but not the other, why?

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Hah? They didn’t?? What are you saying?

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David Wait, so the Acts council did not reach agreement about what to do about the Judiaizers?

@stuck_toilet @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David If you told me the sky was blue, and I look outside and it is blue, I must from then on believe anything you say? That is what you are telling me to do - accept ALL innovations (icons, popes, priestly celibacy etc) because I accept the Bible. Why?

@_coldfact_ @realbenbriggs @needGod_net @Acts17David U wouldn't apply that sort of logic to any other scenario, and this is the Protestant dilemma. Would you accept a book on morality from The Church of Satan or the Taliban? Of course not. You can't deem an institution to be corrupt and then say that they gave you the true bible.

@realbenbriggs @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David So quick to backtrack on your earlier condescending assertion. Maybe after a brush up? So there was not consensus? And? How does this prove which side of any debate the truth of the Holy Spirit was? Again… majority vote decides what is definitively true? Nope.

@_coldfact_ @anus_anon @dmitri_golovin @needGod_net @Acts17David So Nicea 1 Do you see the same consensus there? Was the spirit that Paul passed to Timothy and Peter down the lines in Rome and Antioch not present at Nicea 1?