History UsefulNotes / Christianity

26th Jan '16 7:46:39 PM karstovich2
Is there an issue? Send a Message
A word that you might encounter in England is "Nonconformist", which sounds like a sect but isn't. Nonconformism is simply a term used as a catch-all for all the Protestant denominations that can be found there other than the Anglican Church of England.
to:
A word that you might encounter in England is "Nonconformist", which sounds like a sect but isn't. Nonconformism is simply a term used as a catch-all for all the Protestant denominations that can be found there other than the Anglican Church of England. These were also historically known in England ([[MyFriendsAndZoidberg and Wales]]) as "Dissenters", and historically they came in all flavours (Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Baptist, Quaker, Methodist, Unitarian...). They were historically marginalised in English society, although not as much as the Catholics, but despite (and in some ways because of) this marginalisation they had a profound effect on both [[UsefulNotes/ColonialAmerica the history of the United States]] and of [[UsefulNotes/ATouchOfClassEthnicityAndReligion Great Britain]], but now we're getting ahead of ourselves.
26th Jan '16 7:38:06 PM karstovich2
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Much in the way that the Eastern Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople as first among equals, the Oriental Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Alexandria (who confusingly lives in Cairo), the head of the Coptic Church, as the first-among-equals "head" of the communion. Despite the style "Pope" (which actually predates the Roman use of the term by 300 years) he actually has no authority over the rest of the churches (merely influence). The current Coptic Pope, Theorodos II, is 118th in a line originating with St. Mark himself, and was selected (as all Coptic Popes are selected) by a complicated process involving a synod, the President of Egypt (as a practical matter is always Muslim), and a blindfolded child literally pulling his name out of a container at random (out of a pool of three candidates).
to:
Much in the way that the Eastern Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople as first among equals, the Oriental Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Alexandria (who confusingly lives in Cairo), the head of the Coptic Church, as the first-among-equals "head" of the communion. Despite the style "Pope" (which actually predates the Roman use of the term by 300 years) he actually has no authority over the rest of the churches (merely influence). The current Coptic Pope, Theorodos II, is 118th in a line originating with St. Mark himself, and was selected (as all Coptic Popes are selected) by a complicated process involving a synod, the President of Egypt (as (who as a practical matter is always Muslim), and a blindfolded child literally pulling his name out of a container at random (out of a pool of three candidates).
26th Jan '16 7:37:31 PM karstovich2
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Much in the way that the Eastern Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople as first among equals, the Oriental Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Alexandria (who confusingly lives in Cairo), the head of the Coptic Church, as the first-among-equals "head" of the communion. Despite the style "Pope" (which actually predates the Roman use of the term by 300 years) he actually has no authority over the rest of the churches (merely influence). The current Coptic Pope, Theorodos II, is 118th in a line originating with St. Mark himself, and was selected (as all Coptic Popes are selected) by a complicated process involving a synod, the President of Egypt (who for reasons of simple demography is always Muslim), and blindfolded child literally pulling his name out of a container at random (out of a pool of three candidates).
to:
Much in the way that the Eastern Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople as first among equals, the Oriental Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Alexandria (who confusingly lives in Cairo), the head of the Coptic Church, as the first-among-equals "head" of the communion. Despite the style "Pope" (which actually predates the Roman use of the term by 300 years) he actually has no authority over the rest of the churches (merely influence). The current Coptic Pope, Theorodos II, is 118th in a line originating with St. Mark himself, and was selected (as all Coptic Popes are selected) by a complicated process involving a synod, the President of Egypt (who for reasons of simple demography (as a practical matter is always Muslim), and a blindfolded child literally pulling his name out of a container at random (out of a pool of three candidates).
26th Jan '16 7:36:42 PM karstovich2
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Much in the way that the Eastern Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople as first among equals, the Oriental Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Alexandria (who confusingly lives in Cairo), the head of the Coptic Church, as the first-among-equals "head" of the communion. Despite the style "Pope" (which actually predates the Roman use of the term by 300 years) he actually has no authority over the rest of the churches (merely influence). The current Coptic Pope, Theorodos II, is 118th in a line originating with St. Mark himself.
to:
Much in the way that the Eastern Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Constantinople as first among equals, the Oriental Orthodox recognize the Patriarch of Alexandria (who confusingly lives in Cairo), the head of the Coptic Church, as the first-among-equals "head" of the communion. Despite the style "Pope" (which actually predates the Roman use of the term by 300 years) he actually has no authority over the rest of the churches (merely influence). The current Coptic Pope, Theorodos II, is 118th in a line originating with St. Mark himself.himself, and was selected (as all Coptic Popes are selected) by a complicated process involving a synod, the President of Egypt (who for reasons of simple demography is always Muslim), and blindfolded child literally pulling his name out of a container at random (out of a pool of three candidates).
3rd Jan '16 8:31:14 PM MasterofGalaxies4628
Is there an issue? Send a Message
* God is omniscient (i.e., knows everything that has ever transpired or will transpire, past, present, and future), omnipotent (i.e., capable of doing anything He desires to), and omnibenevolent (i.e., He loves everyone and everything). As above, a lot of philosophy has been dedicated to comprehending how these qualities interact with each other, and how they can coexist given the seemingly contradictory nature of the world man exists in. The general answer is that [[TheChessmaster God is playing a long game]], [[InMysteriousWays the understanding of which is beyond man's comprehension.]] * Christ is not Jesus' last name, but His title designating His role as Messiah and Savior. It comes from the Greek ''Christos'', meaning "[[TheChosenOne anointed]]", in turn a translation of ''Māšîăḥ''. This is why phrases like "Passion of ''the'' Christ" make sense. Note that this also means that referring to Jesus as "Christ" or "Jesus Christ", rather than just "Jesus", constitutes an implied claim that Jesus was, in fact, the Messiah, and thus should be avoided when you're trying to draw a distinction between the Christian view and the "historical" secular view of Jesus. Those who wish to refer to Jesus is a secular or historical way can refer to him as simply Jesus, as he's pretty well known, or Jesus of Nazareth if you want to be specific ("Jesús" is a fairly common male name in Spain and Latin America, and to be honest the word "Jesus" is the result of a game of [[RecursiveTranslation interlingual telephone]] for "Yeshua"--a name that appears in the Old Testament, where it is translated "Joshua"[[note]]English translations of the Bible since the King James Version have relied on the Hebrew Masoretic Text for the Old Testament, while the New Testament is usually compiled from primarily Greek sources. It would not have been immediately obvious to early translators that the Greek Ἰησοῦς ''Iēsous'' and the Hebrew יְהוֹשֻׁעַ‎ ''Yehoshua''/ישוע‎ ''Yeshua'' were the same thing, and so the distinction stuck. Spanish translators ''were'' aware, however, so there are plenty of men named "Jesús" in the Spanish Bible--and now you know why "Jesús" is a common name in Latin America: in Spanish, the Son of God happens to have been named Josh.[[/note]]). Yehoshua in itself is hebrew for "Jehovah salvage" or "Jehovah is salvation" which is pretty apropiate.
to:
* God is omniscient (i.e., [[TheOmniscient knows everything that has ever transpired or will transpire, past, present, and future), future]]), omnipotent (i.e., capable of doing anything He desires to), and omnibenevolent (i.e., [[AllLovingHero He loves everyone and everything).everything]]). As above, a lot of philosophy has been dedicated to comprehending how these qualities interact with each other, and how they can coexist given the seemingly contradictory nature of the world man exists in. The general answer is that [[TheChessmaster God is playing a long game]], [[InMysteriousWays the understanding of which is beyond man's comprehension.]] * [[IAmNotShazam Christ is not Jesus' last name, name]], but His title designating His role as Messiah and Savior. It comes from the Greek ''Christos'', meaning "[[TheChosenOne anointed]]", in turn a translation of ''Māšîăḥ''. This is why phrases like "Passion of ''the'' Christ" make sense. Note that this also means that referring to Jesus as "Christ" or "Jesus Christ", rather than just "Jesus", constitutes an implied claim that Jesus was, in fact, the Messiah, and thus should be avoided when you're trying to draw a distinction between the Christian view and the "historical" secular view of Jesus. Those who wish to refer to Jesus is a secular or historical way can refer to him as simply Jesus, as he's pretty well known, or Jesus of Nazareth if you want to be specific ("Jesús" is a fairly common male name in Spain and Latin America, and to be honest the word "Jesus" is the result of a game of [[RecursiveTranslation interlingual telephone]] for "Yeshua"--a name that appears in the Old Testament, where it is translated "Joshua"[[note]]English translations of the Bible since the King James Version have relied on the Hebrew Masoretic Text for the Old Testament, while the New Testament is usually compiled from primarily Greek sources. It would not have been immediately obvious to early translators that the Greek Ἰησοῦς ''Iēsous'' and the Hebrew יְהוֹשֻׁעַ‎ ''Yehoshua''/ישוע‎ ''Yeshua'' were the same thing, and so the distinction stuck. Spanish translators ''were'' aware, however, so there are plenty of men named "Jesús" in the Spanish Bible--and now you know why "Jesús" is a common name in Latin America: in Spanish, the Son of God happens to have been named Josh.[[/note]]). Yehoshua in itself is hebrew for "Jehovah salvage" or "Jehovah is salvation" which is pretty apropiate.

* Traditional grammatical convention dictates that pronouns relating to God or to Christ be [[CapitalLettersAreMagic capitalized]] (e.g. "Him", "You", "His"). This also includes pronouns referencing Jesus and the Spirit, as they are also Him. This is done simply out of respect and is not a requirement, nor is it always practiced by non-Christians (never mind how thorny this would be for scripts that don't ''have'' capitalization, such as Japanese, Chinese, Korean, and, notably, Hebrew and Ancient Greek). Some English-language Bibles rarely employ this practice. In addition, [[AmbiguousGender God's "gender" is an issue of huge debate]]; it's implied in the Bible that God doesn't have a gender, and Him is just a convenient handle, while others see the Bible as implying God as definitely male, or at least masculine. There is also little doubt that God-the-Son in the form of the flesh-and-blood Jesus who lived 2000 years ago was actually male. Some people even argue that God is the Father, and Jesus is the Son, and the Holy Spirit is, in a sense, the Mother; A "Perfect" Family, if you will.
to:
* Traditional grammatical convention dictates that pronouns relating to God or to Christ be [[CapitalLettersAreMagic capitalized]] (e.g. "Him", "You", "His")."His"), as you may have already noticed while reading this page. This also includes pronouns referencing Jesus and the Spirit, as they are also Him. This is done simply out of respect and is not a requirement, nor is it always practiced by non-Christians (never mind how thorny this would be for scripts that don't ''have'' capitalization, such as Japanese, Chinese, Korean, and, notably, Hebrew and Ancient Greek). Some English-language Bibles rarely employ this practice. In addition, [[AmbiguousGender God's "gender" is an issue of huge debate]]; it's implied in the Bible that God doesn't have a gender, and Him "Him" is just a convenient handle, while others see the Bible as implying God as definitely male, or at least masculine. There is also little doubt that God-the-Son in the form of the flesh-and-blood Jesus who lived 2000 years ago was actually male. Some people even argue that God is the Father, and Jesus is the Son, and the Holy Spirit is, in a sense, the Mother; A "Perfect" Family, if you will.

* '''Protestant Christians''' believe a Christian is one who acknowledges s/he is a sinner, accepts Christ's offer of salvation, is forgiven by God on Christ's behalf, repents and changes his or her life to reflect this, and spreads the word to others. However, there's a bit of variation between denominations regarding whether humans have to initiate this process to be saved, or if God just does it anyway regardless of explicit acceptance. Protestants also claim that the Bible is the ultimate and only necessary authority for knowing how to live a Christian life, but also say that it is largely up to the individual to interpret the Bible's instructions as to how to live their own life (though the learned advice of the clergy is not to be discounted).
to:
* '''Protestant Christians''' believe a Christian is one who acknowledges s/he is a sinner, accepts Christ's offer of salvation, is forgiven by God on Christ's behalf, repents and changes his or her life to reflect this, and spreads the word to others. However, there's a bit of variation between denominations regarding whether humans have to initiate this process to be saved, or if God just does it anyway regardless of explicit acceptance. Protestants also claim that the Bible is the ultimate and only necessary authority for knowing how to live a Christian life, but also say that it is largely [[FigureItOutYourself up to the individual to interpret the Bible's instructions as to how to live their own life life]] (though the learned advice of the clergy is not to be discounted).

* Should we be baptized as in Matthew 28:19 - in the Trinity, or in Acts 2:38. in Jesus' name?
to:
* Should we be baptized as in Matthew 28:19 - in the Trinity, or as in Acts 2:38. 2:38 - in Jesus' name?

* What happens if I, despite being a model Christian, forget to get baptized?
to:
* What happens if I, you, despite being a model Christian, forget to get baptized?

* What exactly is God's name? Jehovah? Yahweh? [=YHVH=]? Jesus? Yeshua/Yehoshua? Eloh? Al-Illah? Allah? Adonai? Abraxas? Lord? The [[AC:Lord]]? God? [[EverythingIsBetterWithBob Bob?]] All of the above? Or [[TheseAreThingsManWasNotMeantToKnow are we not supposed to ask]]?
to:
* What exactly is God's name? Jehovah? Yahweh? [=YHVH=]? Jesus? Yeshua/Yehoshua? Eloh? Al-Illah? Allah? Adonai? Abraxas? Lord? The [[AC:Lord]]? God? [[EverythingIsBetterWithBob Bob?]] [[AliceAndBob Bob]]? [[TakeAThirdOption All of the above? above]]? Or [[TheseAreThingsManWasNotMeantToKnow are we not supposed to ask]]?
19th Dec '15 12:56:22 PM h27kim
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Not exactly a formally recognized group but a fairly large subset of Catholics in an ambiguous category. After their victory in the Chinese Civil War, the Communist Party has required that all religions in mainland China sever ties to foreign bodies, such as the Vatican, and submit to the authority of the Chinese state. Those Catholics who refused to renounce the Vatican went underground and have been subject to persecution, especially before 1980's. Those who did were organized as the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) that maintained the same practices and doctrines as Catholics elsewhere but did not recognize the authority of the Pope, at least in an official sense. Technically, this would make the CPCA a "schismatic" group in Catholic terminology and several Catholic groups, especially those opposed to the government of the People's Republic of China consider them as such. However, the Vatican itself considers the situation as taking place under duress due to the complex situation that is mostly political and nature and accepts the CPCA churches as being in full communion with Rome. This means sacraments at CPCA churches are valid and those who are baptized by CPCA priests and attend masses therein are as Catholic as any other. While CPCA bishops are formally appointed by the Chinese government (after having been "elected" by appropriate bodies) without official input by Vatican, most of them are given informal recognition by the Vatican as well.
to:
Not exactly a formally recognized group but a fairly large subset of Catholics in an ambiguous category. After their victory in the Chinese Civil War, the Communist Party has required that all religions in mainland China sever ties to foreign bodies, such as the Vatican, and submit to the authority of the Chinese state. Those Catholics who refused to renounce the Vatican went underground and have been subject to persecution, especially before 1980's. Those who did were organized as the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) that maintained the same practices and doctrines as Catholics elsewhere but did not recognize the authority of the Pope, at least in an official sense. Technically, this would make the CPCA a "schismatic" group in Catholic terminology and several Catholic groups, especially those opposed to the government of the People's Republic of China consider them as such. However, the Vatican itself considers the situation as taking place under duress due to the complex situation that is mostly political and in nature and accepts the CPCA churches as being in full communion with Rome. This means all sacraments at CPCA churches are considered valid and those who are baptized by CPCA priests and attend masses therein are as Catholic as any other. While CPCA bishops are formally appointed by the Chinese government (after having been "elected" by appropriate bodies) without official input by Vatican, most of them are given informal recognition by the Vatican as well. \n Still, because CPCA is subject to the authority of the Chinese government, it often bends its doctrines to accommodate the latter's wishes, even on matters of religious doctrine. The status of the CPCA, in addition to the more common problem concerning Taiwan, is a major stumbling block preventing a formal relationship between the Holy See and the People's Republic from being established.
19th Dec '15 12:50:42 PM h27kim
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Added DiffLines:
[[AC:Roman Catholics in People's Republic of China]] Not exactly a formally recognized group but a fairly large subset of Catholics in an ambiguous category. After their victory in the Chinese Civil War, the Communist Party has required that all religions in mainland China sever ties to foreign bodies, such as the Vatican, and submit to the authority of the Chinese state. Those Catholics who refused to renounce the Vatican went underground and have been subject to persecution, especially before 1980's. Those who did were organized as the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) that maintained the same practices and doctrines as Catholics elsewhere but did not recognize the authority of the Pope, at least in an official sense. Technically, this would make the CPCA a "schismatic" group in Catholic terminology and several Catholic groups, especially those opposed to the government of the People's Republic of China consider them as such. However, the Vatican itself considers the situation as taking place under duress due to the complex situation that is mostly political and nature and accepts the CPCA churches as being in full communion with Rome. This means sacraments at CPCA churches are valid and those who are baptized by CPCA priests and attend masses therein are as Catholic as any other. While CPCA bishops are formally appointed by the Chinese government (after having been "elected" by appropriate bodies) without official input by Vatican, most of them are given informal recognition by the Vatican as well.
18th Dec '15 2:51:37 AM Morgenthaler
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Like A Badass Out Of Hell is being split into new tropes.
* What exactly is {{Hell}}? Is it a place? Is it eternal? Are there [[FireAndBrimstoneHell literal flames]]? Can you [[LikeABadassOutOfHell escape it]]? Is it maybe a metaphor? Is it layered, with some [[CirclesOfHell circles]] being worse than others, as in Dante's ''[[Literature/TheDivineComedy Inferno]]''?
to:
* What exactly is {{Hell}}? Is it a place? Is it eternal? Are there [[FireAndBrimstoneHell literal flames]]? Can you [[LikeABadassOutOfHell [[EscapedFromHell escape it]]? Is it maybe a metaphor? Is it layered, with some [[CirclesOfHell circles]] being worse than others, as in Dante's ''[[Literature/TheDivineComedy Inferno]]''?
10th Dec '15 8:34:21 AM HeraldAlberich
Is there an issue? Send a Message
namespace
** There are some small unmistakably Christian Unitarian groups, maintaining the old traditions of Christian Unitarianism: that is, a combination of mild Calvinism with Deism, with Jesus being accepted as a great moral teacher and ''possibly'' the Biblical Messiah, after a (unique) fashion (they were rarely pure Deists). This wasn't particularly uncommon in the US in the 18th and 19th centuries, being a highly intellectual offshoot of standard New England Congregationalism. Four US presidents (UsefulNotes/JohnAdams, UsefulNotes/JohnQuincyAdams, UsefulNotes/MillardFillmore, and UsefulNotes/WilliamHowardTaft) were Unitarians in this sense (Taft [[OlderThanTheyThink actually had to fight accusations of atheism]] because of this, as he had been offered the presidency of then-Congregationalist [[IvyLeague Yale]] before he became President of the US and responded "I do not believe in the divinity of Christ" and had to explain that he meant that he was a Christian Unitarian, ''not'' an atheist). UsefulNotes/ThomasJefferson was also a kinda-sorta Unitarian; his Christology and Deism match up, but even if he had been the churchgoing type, it would've been difficult to find a Unitarian church in Virginia (where Episcopalianism was the state religion until Jefferson himself signed the Virginia Charter of Religious Freedom in 1786, and which was not fertile country for Northeastern Congregationalisms of any kind until the Methodists softened the territory up enough for the originally-New Englander Baptists to take over the whole region).
to:
** There are some small unmistakably Christian Unitarian groups, maintaining the old traditions of Christian Unitarianism: that is, a combination of mild Calvinism with Deism, with Jesus being accepted as a great moral teacher and ''possibly'' the Biblical Messiah, after a (unique) fashion (they were rarely pure Deists). This wasn't particularly uncommon in the US in the 18th and 19th centuries, being a highly intellectual offshoot of standard New England Congregationalism. Four US presidents (UsefulNotes/JohnAdams, UsefulNotes/JohnQuincyAdams, UsefulNotes/MillardFillmore, and UsefulNotes/WilliamHowardTaft) were Unitarians in this sense (Taft [[OlderThanTheyThink actually had to fight accusations of atheism]] because of this, as he had been offered the presidency of then-Congregationalist [[IvyLeague [[UsefulNotes/IvyLeague Yale]] before he became President of the US and responded "I do not believe in the divinity of Christ" and had to explain that he meant that he was a Christian Unitarian, ''not'' an atheist). UsefulNotes/ThomasJefferson was also a kinda-sorta Unitarian; his Christology and Deism match up, but even if he had been the churchgoing type, it would've been difficult to find a Unitarian church in Virginia (where Episcopalianism was the state religion until Jefferson himself signed the Virginia Charter of Religious Freedom in 1786, and which was not fertile country for Northeastern Congregationalisms of any kind until the Methodists softened the territory up enough for the originally-New Englander Baptists to take over the whole region).
6th Dec '15 4:18:24 PM AndIntroducingALeg
Is there an issue? Send a Message
Within Protestantism generally, belief in the Real Presence of Christ in Communion tends to be less common the "lower" the church. This is not, however, the case in Anglicanism for rather peculiar reasons. The Anglican church uses its ''Book of Common Prayer'' as its "rule of faith." This includes the "39 Articles," which are basic statements of doctrine. These state that the bread and wine actually "partake" in the body and blood of Christ. Generally speaking, high church Anglicans consider the "39 Articles" to be of historical but not doctrinal interest, but due to their closeness to Catholics they do affirm the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Low church Anglicans, on the other hand, take the 39 articles seriously and so they ''also'' believe in the Real Presence of Christ in Communion. Likewise, it also specifies the various necessary services (daily prayer, sunday services, weddings, funerals, etc.) as well as the set readings from the Old and New Testaments as well as Psalms.
to:
Within Protestantism generally, belief in the Real Presence of Christ in Communion tends to be less common the "lower" the church. This is not, however, the case in Anglicanism for rather peculiar reasons. The Anglican church uses its ''Book of Common Prayer'' as its "rule of faith." This includes the "39 Articles," which are basic statements of doctrine. These state that the bread and wine actually "partake" in the body and blood of Christ. Generally speaking, high church Anglicans consider the "39 Articles" to be of historical but not doctrinal interest, but due to their closeness to Catholics they do affirm the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Low church Anglicans, on the other hand, take the 39 articles seriously and so they ''also'' believe in the Real Presence of Christ in Communion. Likewise, it also specifies the various necessary services (daily prayer, sunday services, weddings, funerals, etc.) as well as the set readings from the Old and New Testaments as well as Psalms.\\
This list shows the last 10 events of 161. Show all.