Re: 13 surprising Mormon facts
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:10 am
Alright well good to know where I can look up the Mormon perspective.
Of course, a full history of the Bible, various traditions that surrounded it, the church councils that codified the canon, and what happened after that over the centuries is a subject all in itself.
Now I'm not denying many of the things mentioned so far but from my perspective there are other possible explanations for some of the major events. Some would say the changes are inspired by God, some would say these changes were not of God and do not/never did represent the real teachings. Others will say this shows why the church needed to be restored, others still, like myself, would point to a particular denomination or group of them and say "here is where the unbroken line and succession of belief reside". Like the Mormon perspective given here we Orthodox also believe that it is our church and its clergy that hold the proper apostolic succession. The Eastern Orthodox Church also claims to have the fullness of the faith and claims to be the original (or rather the unbroken the modern day descendants of it).
To be very clear this is not saying that only Orthodox Christians are going to heaven and no else is. Far from it. In fact Orthodox Christians, having the fullness of the faith and all the spiritual tools at their disposal will be judged far more harshly. We are judged by the light in our hearts and to whom more is given, more is expected. To what extent non Orthodox Churches have valid sacraments and such is not something we can judge (though you will find every opinion possible under the sun and it can get kind of nauseating).
So I think it is good for me to clear the air regarding this before continuing. It is a long winded way yo say that a Restorationist perspective says the line was broken but now has been restored, whereas I say the line was not broken and here it is.
Of course, a full history of the Bible, various traditions that surrounded it, the church councils that codified the canon, and what happened after that over the centuries is a subject all in itself.
Now I'm not denying many of the things mentioned so far but from my perspective there are other possible explanations for some of the major events. Some would say the changes are inspired by God, some would say these changes were not of God and do not/never did represent the real teachings. Others will say this shows why the church needed to be restored, others still, like myself, would point to a particular denomination or group of them and say "here is where the unbroken line and succession of belief reside". Like the Mormon perspective given here we Orthodox also believe that it is our church and its clergy that hold the proper apostolic succession. The Eastern Orthodox Church also claims to have the fullness of the faith and claims to be the original (or rather the unbroken the modern day descendants of it).
To be very clear this is not saying that only Orthodox Christians are going to heaven and no else is. Far from it. In fact Orthodox Christians, having the fullness of the faith and all the spiritual tools at their disposal will be judged far more harshly. We are judged by the light in our hearts and to whom more is given, more is expected. To what extent non Orthodox Churches have valid sacraments and such is not something we can judge (though you will find every opinion possible under the sun and it can get kind of nauseating).
So I think it is good for me to clear the air regarding this before continuing. It is a long winded way yo say that a Restorationist perspective says the line was broken but now has been restored, whereas I say the line was not broken and here it is.
