/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

interdenominational warzone number 755182

>>755182

The 4 denominations that have appealed the most to me are Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Baptists (specifically IFB Baptists) and also the LDS Church.

Catholicism and Orthodoxy have been the biggest two for me. I've tried larping as catholic about a dozen times (longest period was about 2.5 months) but always end up doubting it and feeling like its wrong, and the only position I find tenable there is either sedevacantism or the SSPX, I haven't really been able to mental gymnastics around the issues with the modern church. I’m still open to it but it really just felt like a dead end, and I’m not unconvinced that a large part of the hold it had on me was the aesthetics and holistic feel of it rather than really believing its true.

I’ve watched a good bit of Jay Dyer’s content and am familiar with Orthodox basics, and its an incredibly appealing option (as in it seems to be closest to the Truth) but I’ve largely been off-put by how foreign it feels. If I can’t come up with any good reason not to (or don’t receive some clear sign not to) I’m probably going to become Orthodox, and attend a ROCOR Divine Liturgy tomorrow.

Then lastly the other two I can’t shake would be Baptists which I do feel drawn to in a sub-rational kind of way. If I feel a Holy Spirit kind of “pull” towards any denom. It would be towards baptists. But that feeling isn’t really enough for me to just jump in, I need more.

Then lastly there’s the LDS which some here might laugh at, and while they are pretty out there relative to other denoms it seems like most people straw man them. I’m familiar with just about every argument against them whether its the multiple versions of the BOM or the archaeological arguments or the connections to Freemasonry but at the end of the day I don’t see anything that definitively rules it out. And out of all denominations their life-affirming, philosophy along with their theology appeals to me the most on a personal level, in terms of personal values. HOWEVER, I’m willing to sacrifice those personal values for the sake of Truth, if only I could discern what that truth actually is. But because of that overlap in values I haven’t written them off or treated them like a meme.

Okay so sorry for posting my whole life’s story here, but for anyone who’s genuinely interested in offering advice I figured it might be useful. Basically I’m just writing this as a last ditch kind of effort before I make a final decision. I’ve wanted to not take this decision lightly but its been a year and a half so I figured I’d be better off just jumping into something than just stagnating for another year. So yeah feel free to post anything in favor of your denomination or anything that might be of use to anybody here. I’m basically just looking for any sort of sign so any help will be appreciated, thanks.

>>755188

Yeah they are all memes, but i don't even use 8chan that often.

I've been through the whole rigamarole where I've looked into Islam, Gnosticism, Protestantism etc. but its only these 4 that have seemed like real options and that I can see myself believing in

>>755190

Pastor Anderson would condemn the idea of Mormons being considered a Christian denomination, and they neither qualify as such according to the definition of this board's sticky.

And you also have Peterson as another chanian idol. Not much of a diligent reasoning or inquiry if you ask me.

Here is our southern Baptist confessional document. Do you have any points of disagreement?

http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfm2000.asp

>>755196

No I wasn't clear, I meant I USED to be a Peterson guy, same with the non-literal stuff.

And yes I'm aware that most Christians don't consider mormons christians because of the whole non trinitarian thing, and God not creating the universe ex nihilo and Jesus being considered Lucifer's brother etc.

I'm just calling it "Christian" in the sense that they deify and worship Christ.

I guess rather than pointing to disagreements with the specific Baptist doctrine I'd start with the underlying reason you're believing in it in the first place. It comes down to the Baptists believing in the Holy Spirit guiding those who will be saved to the correct interpretation by means of the Bible and working directly upon them. But Catholics and Orthodox have more of a scholastic/rational basis for it, and also an argument from truth passed down via tradition and whatnot.

So I can see both sides of it, it really has to do with where you start your reasoning from. Who gets to do the interpreting, thats the fundamental question here.

>I’ve watched a good bit of Jay Dyer’s content and am familiar with Orthodox basics, and its an incredibly appealing option (as in it seems to be closest to the Truth) but I’ve largely been off-put by how foreign it feels. If I can’t come up with any good reason not to (or don’t receive some clear sign not to) I’m probably going to become Orthodox, and attend a ROCOR Divine Liturgy tomorrow.

Well… "Foreign" eh, true. I came from a Prot background to Orthodoxy, and it was definitely a bizarre change. I was fortunate to have an almost all-convert Orthodox Church nearby. I think it made it easier tbh. I've been to the Greek monastery a few times, and if Greek was the lingua franca - I probably would've had second thoughts more times than I already did. It helps with things being in English.

You should perhaps look up 'Nicodemus Hagorite' on YouTube. Posts some interesting videos, and some fascinating talks by Constantine Zalalas (who is a layman that I believe has authority from his bishop to educate others in Orthodoxy), and plenty of patristic quotes and interesting stories (hope you like reading). Namely look into the lectures by Constantine Zalalas, the lectures are clearly intended for an Orthodox audience and provide insight into what's up in Orthodoxy - some of the issues Orthodoxy in America faces.

I found the lectures helpful, as well as the patristic quotes. Perhaps they'll be of some value to you.

>>755201

Thanks. The foreignness of it is less of an issue than it was in the past and I'm pretty sure the church near me has a good amount of converts.

Listening to the channel now, thanks for the recommendation!

bump

Still thinking about all of this stuff, and trying to narrow in on what I'm going to do.

>>755242

I come from a similar background as you, I became Catholic.

What ultimately influenced your decision?

>>755248

One Church body

>>755274

What do you mean though, doesn't every other denom claim to have that to? What in your view is unique about the Catholic Mystical Body of Christ (aside from just believing its the real one).

>>755278

too*

>>755278

It covers the widest demographic

>>755284

Is that really an argument for it though? Especially when most of its practitioners don't really seem to believe?

Shouldn't we be going for quality over quantity?

>>755289

It holds the deepest spiritual life

>>755294

Op here, yeah but from the outside looking in I’m just not sure.

Probably going to pull an allnighter tonight, think on it, and pray on it a bit, still thinking hard but I'm probably going to check out a ROCOR church tomorrow.

>>755305

It is made to accommodate many different demographics

>>755411

Yeah I mean Orthodoxy seems open enough to foreigners, but I think both sides have lost their evangelical zeal.

However as somebody who'd probably take a sedevacantist or at the very least some sort of SSPX position, I can't really say that that matters to me. Ideally both sides would be doing far better in converting more people, I view the majority of the issues as incidental to current problems, rather than systematic within the churches themselves.

>>755182

> I'm still pretty much unsure as to which denomination is correct.

There is no "correct" denomination. Go to whichever church you fit in the best and keep your relationship with God between yourself and God.

>>755430

Yikes, don't know about that one chief

>>755452

>just feels incredibly larpy. sorry if I am misjudging.

It is pretty larpy, but it probably seems larpier than it is because I'm condensing all of it down

And yeah I guess what I'm looking for is to see if sacraments, structure and external things can help to bolster that Faith within myself, because while I do feel a presence of God, my faith isn't particularly strong. A lot of it has to do with uncertainty. I'd like to think it worked in the general way you're talking about I'm just uncertain.

It makes sense to me that there would be some sort of tradition passed on or line back to the apostles, whether its Apostolic Succession with the RCC and Orthodox, or the trail of blood meme with the baptists, although even that's kind of flimsy.

I agree that faith is important and I shouldn't expect external institutions to build that for me though, I think that's what lots of larpers do.

I haven't ruled out baptists, but I've been looking into orthodoxy all day today pretty much.

>>755185

>the LDS Church

A "discerning Christian" would know that Mormonism is an anti-Christ doctrine.

>>755460

I'm certainly skeptical of it, but if you read my post I explain why I haven't ruled it out.

Unlike other groups termed cults or that appear to be influenced by demons/evil the mormons relatively unique. They produce good works, have a very healthy social order, all while not denying Christ or being pagan.

Now if they are wicked or anti-christ like you say we've never seen anything like it where they're so pristine, seemingly godly, seemingly good people, without any glaring indicators that they're of the devil.

Now I'll reiterate, I don't know, for all I know they are a group that leads you to hell, but I'm unsure at the end of the day.

>>755463

>They produce good works

It is a cult that breaks up families. It has produced much bad fruit, and since they preach a false gospel, they are damning people to hell.

>all while not denying Christ

Mormonism explicitly denies that Jesus is the Christ. It is an anti-Christ doctrine.

Mormon "Jesus" is not Jesus Christ. Embed related.

>>755464

I'm just not convinced, like its different certainly, but they still follow Jesus.

How does it break up families?

>>755659

I think you're a disingenuous shill and that your thread should be deleted.

>>755663

Epic. No I mean I don't really expect to get much out of this thread but I figured there's no downside, maybe I'll get pointed somewhere.

I just think most of the arguments against mormons are meme arguments, like its kind of ridiculous to imply the nice prim and proper guys on bicycles are soldiers of satan. At worst they're heretics or fools, but at best there's something to their religion.

bump

>>755799

what would you recommend?

>>755801

You a fan of Jay?

>>755803

What's everybody's thoughts on Steven Bancarz

>>755464

Let me say first that I also think LDS is wrong, but your arguments against it are the wrong ones:

>It is a cult that breaks up families

"For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law." - Matthew 10:35

If your Christianity isn't splitting you from anyone in your family, either they're all miraculously saved or it's not true Christianity, it's watered-down weak sauce.

>It has produced much bad fruit

True. But not exactly a detailed argument. What examples are you referring to?

>Mormonism explicitly denies that Jesus is the Christ.

No, they deny he is God. They don't understand the trinity- they do believe he is the messiah.

Mormonism is Christianity for dummies. It literally just removes any complex theology and replaces it with something a kindergartner could understand - probably because it was written by a man with a kindergarten education.

There are also major corruption problems within the church, it's a bit of a pyramid scheme tbh.

I'm not sure that Mormons are unsaved… but I'm very worried about it. I'm not sure you have to understand the trinity to call upon Christ for salvation and to love and do God's will… but not realizes Christ is God would heavily impede one's understanding of the father unless you understood the rest of the gospels.

I have a broader belief of what's necessary for salvation than most Christians, I think it's about whether you have the Holy Spirit within you and whether you listen to God more than whether one is doctrinally correct- on the other hand, if you were really listening to God, I'd expect he'd reveal your doctrinal errors to them, as he has for me…

>>755185

LDS church isn't Christian, they're a Christian-themed cult. It's not a strawman. The official position of the LDS church is that Man can become God of his own planet. It fundamentally disagrees with orthodox (lower case o) Christianity in the concept of the personhood of God to the effect that they are incompatible with one another.

>>756018

Yeah I was thinking of the same quote as well with the family part, and as for the works part I don’t really know enough to say.

Fundamentally their differences seem to rely on revealed truth, so it’s a matter of presuppositions and assumptions.

But I feel like to a large degree I’m simply attracted to the externalities of the religion and to the liveliness of it (as well as the values component I described above). That’s not really enough of a reason to convert to something though, and I can’t really seem to discern what’s true.

>>756027

I get that but who’s defining what’s orthodox here when various Christian denominations can’t agree on the appropriate means of exegis of scripture. The way I see it you have a different meaning when you talk about lower case o orthodox Christianity than the others, you’re just describing the few things you all have in common. Just because Mormons have a narrower intersection with your beliefs that doesn’t mean you can say they aren’t orthodox without defining what orthodox Christianity really is (which all of you disagree on).

>>756030

Orthodox Christianity is defined by the personhood of God. The Apostle's Creed is a good bar for separating orthodox Christianity from Christian cults. God within orthodox Christianity is defined as the Holy Trinity, being the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, each being His own person but all fully God. God is unique, eternal, and does not stand among other gods.

It's preposterous to throw away any cireteria for defining orthodox Christianity. If anyone who claims Christ is considered Christian, then anything goes. Within this framework, a Muslim could very easily be a Christian because he would also claim Jesus.

>>756018

>If your Christianity isn't splitting you from anyone in your family, either they're all miraculously saved or it's not true Christianity, it's watered-down weak sauce.

Anti-Christ cults also split up families. Ever heard of Scientology? It's a valid criticism since it is bad fruit produced by Mormonism, it is not a division in the family caused by someone turning to God, it is division in families and the community caused by someone turning to an anti-Christ doctrine.

>No, they deny he is God. They don't understand the trinity- they do believe he is the messiah.

Christ is God, to deny that Jesus is God in the flesh is to deny that Jesus is the Christ. The prophecies of the Old Testament make it clear that Christ = God. Their doctrine is therefore antichrist.

>Mormonism is Christianity for dummies.

It isn't Christianity at all, they do not preach the Christian gospel. They preach:

<Jesus was not conceived by the Holy Spirit (no virgin birth)

<that Jesus had a "heavenly mother and a father", neither of which were a monotheistic God

<Lucifer is Jesus' brother

<Jesus had three wives

<Jesus was not God

<that faith in Jesus is not enough for salvation (this is how they get Mormons to do missionary work and "temple building", which they say are necessary for "salvation")

It is a false gospel.

>I'm not sure that Mormons are unsaved

>I think it's about whether you have the Holy Spirit within you and whether you listen to God more than whether one is doctrinally correct

You cannot be filled with the Holy Spirit without believing the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Since Mormonism preaches a false gospel, believing it cannot fill someone with the Holy Spirit.

>>It has produced much bad fruit

>True. But not exactly a detailed argument. What examples are you referring to?

They are damning people to hell by preaching a false gospel.

Is there anyone who is Orthodox here who have an opinion of Jay Dyer? I'm not orthodox but have started watching him just recently and don't really take offense to his opinions of different denominations since I was never strong in faith to begin with having come from a protestant upbringing.

I don't have any ill will against Roman Catholics or Orthodoxy but am kinda blown away about hearing all this history of arguments settled between the church council throughout history. If you're Orthodox and don't recommend Jay Dyer, who would you recommend (& who do you recommend additionally to him if you do like him)?

>>756047

he sure loves to take pictures of himself

>>756044

>Anti-Christ cults also split up families. Ever heard of Scientology? It's a valid criticism since it is bad fruit produced by Mormonism, it is not a division in the family caused by someone turning to God, it is division in families and the community caused by someone turning to an anti-Christ doctrine.

This doesn't counter the scripture I cited. Cults may cause family members to turn against one another, but so does Christianity. This fact, therefore, is unhelpful in determining whether a belief is right or wrong.

>Christ is God, to deny that Jesus is God in the flesh is to deny that Jesus is the Christ. The prophecies of the Old Testament make it clear that Christ = God. Their doctrine is therefore antichrist.

It denies our definition of Christ, sure, but a lot of people thought the messiah would be different. Understand your interpretation is not the only one (though I think your interpretation is the correct one, your inability to understand your detractor's opinions and to create strawmen for them concerns me)

>It is a false gospel.

It is a theologically incorrect gospel, certainly. Does the core of their gospel entail submission to Jesus as their Lord and Savior, belief that he forgives their sins, and commitment to living by his commandments? I don't know, but if it does, I'm not sure one's stupid theological opinions make a person unsaved. Can a retarded person who can't think in the abstract be saved? If so, obviously mistaken semi-stupid people should have salvation open to them as well - or are you of the opinion Christ came only for those of a 110 IQ or higher?

>You cannot be filled with the Holy Spirit without believing the true gospel of Jesus Christ. Since Mormonism preaches a false gospel, believing it cannot fill someone with the Holy Spirit.

Great circular reasoning there.

>They are damning people to hell by preaching a false gospel.

Uhhh… that's unverifiable. Examples of bad fruit should be observable, we have no way of knowing who is in heaven or hell until we ourselves are judged.

>>756039

I think there’s a difference between saying someone is “Christian” and saying someone is “orthodox”. Defining it by the apostles creed seems pretty arbitrary because different denoms aren’t going to agree on that.

I’d argue anyone who calls Christ God is a “Christian” in the vague sense of the word as they’re a follower/worshipper of Christ. But when you’re defining orthodoxy or right opinion/beliefs on the matter that calls into question the entire belief of the thread.

I don’t know what your personal beliefs are, but a catholic would say your definition is insufficient, so would an Eastern Orthodox person, and so on.

I don’t think it’s absurd at all, what I’m saying is that there isn’t a universally excepted definition of orthodoxy.

>>756061

Some of my reservations about joining were exactly these. While externally the church appears to be better off than the Catholic Church, it’s still corrupt and rotting even if it’s at a slower rate.

I’ve never been one of the pol types to approach it for political and pragmatic reasons, and the Slavic/foreigness has been off putting.

The lax sexual stuff is also offputting although it’s not a make it or break it thing.

I also find myself intuitively leaning towards the catholic/thomist view of god more given the superficial understanding of it all I’ve developed so far.

Are you catholic?

>>756049

Hey thanks for contributing to the thread. Like I’ve written above I’m just unsure what the theologically correct interpretation is. And like I said before I think the whole Mormon argument hinges on whether or not Joseph Smith was in contact with the divine, as out there as their beliefs are.

In truth idk if I could ever believe it though, it’s too far off from the Apostolic/Catholic view I started with.

Find a church that believes in 1 Corinthians 1:10

>I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree together, so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be united in mind and conviction.

Also that is Sola Scriptura

>All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. -2 Timothy 3:16-17

Ignore the Cathies and Orthros that says otherwise since they been trained to despise Sola Scriptua and to think that it means “interpreting the Bible however you want” in addition their own rules either are looser or stricter than what the Bible’s position on certain subjects due to them being “the teachings of men” that Jesus criticized the Jews of His time about

> “‘These people honor me with their lips,

but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain;

their teachings are merely human rules.’” - Matthew 15:8-9

>>756061

Thank you for your response, however I'm not looking to Orthodoxy for Putin, modern conservatism or for them being slavs. I like the idea of there being a council instead of

a major head leader and am intrigued by the Orthodox's perspective on divine simplicity. Fornication is a bit off-putting like >>756067 mentions though.

Thank you for the references in >>756076.

>>756067

>Hey thanks for contributing to the thread. Like I’ve written above I’m just unsure what the theologically correct interpretation is. And like I said before I think the whole Mormon argument hinges on whether or not Joseph Smith was in contact with the divine, as out there as their beliefs are.

>In truth idk if I could ever believe it though, it’s too far off from the Apostolic/Catholic view I started with.

Well, don't take me as encouragement to be LDS. I hate irrational posts, so I argued with him, but LDS theology contradicts the bible in so many places. Joseph Smith had real trouble dealing in the abstract - the core failing of LDS is the inability to conceive of God as an "essence" a Platonic ideal of life, love, light, etc. - that is embodied in 3 persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Rather, Mr. Smith was like, "well God must be the Father, because Christ is the Son of God, and…umm, we're going to say that's -literally- the case, like Heavenly DNA knocked up Mary the case because… I can't deal with abstract thought."

So, while I hate people making strawmen, LDS is really for people who don't have an education (US school through 4-year degree doesn't even count as an education anymore)

>>756061

>He's a fornicator/contraceptive user

Do you say this in the knowledge that he's currently fornicating with his gf/fiance unrepentantly or that he was once a fornicator before coming to the church?

>All the rest of your post

What >>756085 said:

>I'm not looking to Orthodoxy for Putin, modern conservatism or for them being slavs

Particularly

>and am intrigued by the Orthodox's perspective on divine simplicity [and the essence/energies distinction]

I suppose what is intriguing about Orthodoxy for non-doms floating around at the moment is a raft of things, but for me and I'm sure many others it's the core distinction in conception of God as identified above. I happened to tune into Jay's livestream for 10 mins last night where he was doing his talks on traditional metaphsyics and he went into a mini rant repeatedly asking the question 'where is everyone else [ie. youtubers] who's supposed to being doing this [teaching Orthodox theology]? Why isn't any one else doing this? Why am I the only one doing this?' and I thought he had a point. I'm not aware of any others who cover things like he does. I have Fr Spyrodon and Thomas Hopko or whatever their names are on my list to check out/that I sometimes watch/listen to, but there doesn't seem to be anywhere accessible that does straight up comparative theology like Jay does. I intend to check out some others found in >>753423 , but again, not sure the extent these go into comparative theology with Thomism

>Catechism of the Orthodox Church

Which one?

>>756076

I probably should just read through all of it. I'm probably going to tentatively settle on something and get going with more reading. I've read a bit of seraphim rose, confessions and parts of both catechisms but I have yet to systematically go through all of it.

>>756086

I view it as significantly intellectually underdeveloped yeah but there's something appealing about the Romanticism of the Great Awakening religions and mormonism seems to be the least retarded out of all of them.

I do have a pretty scholastic bent though and see the holistic nature of something like the summa in catholicism as being vastly superior, my only issue is not knowing if its actually true.

>>756049

>This fact, therefore, is unhelpful in determining whether a belief is right or wrong.

Yes it is. If a satanic cult causes a family's children to break communication with their Christian parents then it is bad fruit. You are trying to argue that "breaking up families" is ambiguous and therefore insufficient, but the context of the destruction of family cohesion to pursue a false gospel, therefore the fruit is objectively bad.

>a lot of people thought the messiah would be different. Understand your interpretation is not the only one

What's your point? Some people think Jesus was a Buddha, doesn't mean that they get to redefine what "Christ" means and call themselves Christians.

>It is a theologically incorrect gospel, certainly.

It is a false gospel. You are trying to split hairs to defend people who are preaching an anti-Christ doctrine.

>Does the core of their gospel entail submission to Jesus as their Lord and Savior, belief that he forgives their sins, and commitment to living by his commandments?

No, it doesn't, because their definition of Jesus is that he is a space alien.

>I'm not sure one's stupid theological opinions make a person unsaved.

You can't be saved without believing the true gospel. If your "stupid theological opinions" are based on lies, then you cannot be saved, just as New Agers who believe that Jesus was a Buddha cannot be saved by believing that.

>Can a retarded person who can't think in the abstract be saved?

They would fall under the umbrella of invincible ignorance. The gospel is however so simple that even small children and many handicapped people can understand it and be saved.

>are you of the opinion Christ came only for those of a 110 IQ or higher?

No.

>Great circular reasoning there.

It is not circular reasoning, it is simple logical deduction:

Premise: One can only be filled with the Holy Spirit if they believe the true gospel

Premise: Mormons do not preach the true gospel

Conclusion: Mormons are not filled with the Holy Spirit.

That is not a circular argument.

>Uhhh… that's unverifiable.

It is unverifiable that those who are not saved go to hell? If you don't believe the scripture, then why don't you just say so?

>Examples of bad fruit should be observable, we have no way of knowing who is in heaven or hell until we ourselves are judged.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that only people who are saved can do good works. The Bible does however clearly outline the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and the fact that one can only be saved by believing on that gospel.

Serious question: Are you even a Christian?

Why specifically the Christian religion? If god has revealed himself to you, wouldn't he be a bit more specific than "but Christian though"?

<Jordan Peterson

Oh you're a brainlet. I guess it makes more sense then. Just become a Catholic so you can "participate in the community" that so many people say is so good.

>>755463

Mormonism was founded by a guy that tried to marry two lawfully wedded women from his congregation apparently. If that's not a sign of bad fruits, I don't know what is. Also, don't forget that the sun rises on the good and the evil alike. Just because things look nice doesn't mean they're ordained by God.

>>756121

Joseph Smith had 36 wives. He was Freemason and Mormon temple rituals are nearly identical to Freemasonic rituals. Mormons believe that Jesus is a space alien and that a faithful Mormon will become glorified into being equal to Jesus and will travel to another planet and populate it with new humans. They receive special magic underwear with runic markings on them that they are told will protect them from evil, and they must wear it for the rest of their lives.

It is a satanic cult.

>>756060

Any "denom" who disagrees with the Apostles Creed isn't orthodox. Any Catholic or Orthodox, etc. who disagrees with the apostles creed is not a Catholic or Orthodox. That's why it's a good bar for finding orthodox Christian denominations. You should really research Christianity more if you're this foggy about the details. Read your Bible and Christian history.

>>756119

>contraception

Yeah, it is kinda strange that Orthodoxy seems to be permissive about that and re-marriage but seemingly hardline on everything else (q below though). I haven't looked into Orthodoxy nor the arguments for and against each one all that much tbh, but from what I do know even if I ever were to one day begome I can't imagine accepting the church's teaching on that. I don't know if that would be considered a sin/looked down upon by the church or if I could point to Rom 14:3 in my defense.

>they don't realize Orthodoxy has been a victim of modernity

Is that as in corrupt clergy/political pawns etc. (which I'm aware of) or liberalising on morals/doctrine (which apart from contraception/re-marriage/the recently planted Ukranian Orthodox Church leader saying we need to be soft on the gays like the west)

>This one

Thanks brah, turns out I already had this buried in my favourites from someone posting before - good to know though.

>>756128

>(which apart from contraception/re-marriage/the recently planted Ukranian Orthodox Church leader saying we need to be soft on the gays like the west)

I'm not aware of, I meant to add on the end of that sentance

>>756120

I wrote and clarified that I used to watch that stuff, and that I don’t follow it anymore.

And if you read my post I said I was drawn to Catholicism for awhile but I’ve been unsure of it and felt like it was a dead end. So I don’t know, you tell me why I’m at this dead end? It’s stagnant and I’m unsure of what to do.

>>756127

I think you’re missing my point, but I do prefer the form of Christianity you’re defining as orthodox. I know all of the wacky stuff about Mormons that you and the other guys have written I’ve researched it extensively, I’m just coming at it from another point of view I guess. The wacky stuff has kept me from joining it though.

I’ve read the NT, probably about a third of the OT and have a basic understanding of Christian history.

>>756123

Yeah that's my point. At best it's an entirely against what Christ taught. At worst, it's like you said, a Satanic cult.

>>756177

Op here, and yeah I get the vibe that there's something supernatural going on with it, so if its not real then its possible it could be demonic, but I just find it absurd because they don't seem to produce many bad fruits. But yeah I have no clue, maybe they are worse than I think.

>>755185

Mormons directly contradict the Bible on many issues. It is probably possible to be a Mormon and a Christian for a while, but I don't think it's possible to remain that way once you've seriously examined the teachings of the Mormons–you either cease to be a Mormon or cease to be a Christian. Bruce Charlton's blog was helpful to me in becoming a Christian, but eventually he started going down this rabbit hole of denying the validity of huge chunks of the Bible because they don't fit with Mormonism.

I don't care that much whether you become Catholic, Baptist, or Orthodox, but steer clear of the Mormons.

>>756224

I’ve come to the conclusion over the past few days that it’s not true but I have no idea what is true.

>>756468

Any catholics or sedes around

>>756117

Exactly what beliefs do you think are necessary for a person to be saved? What is the minimum IQ necessary for a person to comprehend those beliefs? Therefore, you think everyone unable to comprehend those beliefs goes to hell, right?

What I'm trying to explain is that you hold things necessary for salvation which are just beneficial to leading the Christian life.

What does it matter if someone thinks Jesus is a space alien if they have faith in him, follow his commands and love him? Certainly, they're not right - but that doesn't make them unsaved.

You say they're not following the "true" Jesus - you're saying Jesus was defined by his physical parameters and not his Spirit?

If they have faith in Him, misunderstandings can be worked through by the Holy Spirit.

Long ago I created a denomination list/quiz to help people, but it wasn't the best. Should I try to find, update, and post it?

Also the most basic question anyone should ask regarding the "correct" denomination/sect is: What did Jesus/the Apostles teach about being Justified before God? Do you become justified by means of sanctification (with the help of grace) or faith (in the sense of trust). If you assume the former, then it doesn't really matter, but typically this is where Roman catholicism/eastern orthodoxy churches fits in. If you realized it's the latter then you would want to go to a traditional protestant congregation.

However if you (for any reason) concluded that it was belief (only as in knowledge) in God gets you justified, then you need sit down reevaluate your understandings, because even the demons believe that God exists.

>>756744

Sure, feel free to post it, sounds interesting

>>756772

Bump I guess to see if anything else happens

Starting to get blackpilled on all of this, anyone have any advice?

bump

OP there is no "correct" denomination. We're all corrupt in one way or another. Best bet is to find a local congregation that places emphasis on the work and movements of the holy spirit. Small, local, non denoms tend to be the type. But could also be Catholic/Baptist/I don't know. Because tbh it depends more on each local congregation than the denomination at large, and depends largely on the head (the leader) of that local congregation. Ask God to lead you to His man in your local area.

>>756044

> Christ is God, to deny that Jesus is God in the flesh is to deny that Jesus is the Christ. The prophecies of the Old Testament make it clear that Christ = God.

What prophecies exactly?

>to deny that Jesus is God in the flesh is to deny that Jesus is the Christ

That's unbiblical tbh

>>755185

I'm Orthodox, so I think Orthodoxy is the best, but everything is fine really as long as it isn't Catholicism.

OP here

Been watching lots of apologetics and oscillating again, but I'm basically in the same position I've been in. I feel like I've gained clarity, and although I gave up briefly I felt pulled back. Not really sure what to make of it. I appreciate some of the more useful feedback in the thread though, I thought I'd write that. This is difficult but I feel like I'm converging on the true path to God.

bump