This is wrong, it depends on what the bow is for. Angels rebuked people who worshipped them, not because people bowed to them
We see people in the Bible bowing to and prostrating to people/Angels/things all the time
on the third day, behold, it happened that a man came from Saul’s camp with his clothes torn and dust on his head. So it was, when he came to David, that he fell to the ground and prostrated himself.
2 Samuel 1:2
Now Joseph was governor over the land; and it was he who sold to all the people of the land. And Joseph’s brothers came and bowed down before him with their faces to the earth.
Genesis 42:6
David also arose afterward, went out of the cave, and called out to Saul, saying, “My lord the king!” And when Saul looked behind him, David stooped with his face to the earth, and bowed down
1 Samuel 24:8
Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground.
Genesis 19:1
I can go on and on.
We don't pray to Angels and Saints the same way we pray to God. We ask the Saints and Angels for their intercessions, meaning we ask for them to pray for us. We don't pray to them as if they can answer our prayers, only God can. Rather we ask them for their intercessions because their prayers are powerful.
Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.
James 5:16
First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people,
1 Timothy 2:1
Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,
Hebrews 12:1
Jesus lived for 33 years
I agree with the last line especially. If there's anything which has caused the rapid destabilization of societal values and morals, it's weak Christianity and bad theology.
Orthodoxy is the way! ☦️
Always remember, God is providential, all things happen for a reason. We may not always know why, but know that the Lord's will be done and not ours.
No matter what happens, continue to carry your Cross, God loves you more than you could conceive!
What does it mean to take up your cross? It means the willing acceptance, at the hand of Providence, of every means of healing, bitter though it may be, that is offered. Do great catastrophies fall on you? Be obedient to God’s will, as Noah was. Is sacrifice demanded of you? Give yourself into God’s
— St. Nikolai Velimirovich
if the Bible was real
Convert to Orthodoxy.
How does the cuneiform prove the Bible isn't real? This is both appeal to antiquity fallacy and a non-sequitor. The cuneiform being older doesn't disprove the Bible, and it doesn't follow that the texts having historical agreements makes the Bible false.
If anything, the cuneiform is historical attestation to the accuracy of the Bible in its history.
It is silly, if his reading of the 10 commandments of making likenesses were true, it would make images, videos, and art of anything on earth sinful. So he would already be breaking this command by having a pepe next to his name as its in the image of a frog.
Scripture is not iconoclastic, there are extensive passages in the Old Testament regarding the liturgical worship and the use of icons.
In 1 Kings 6:23-35 Solomon makes carvings of Cherubim in the Temple, in Exodus 25:18-20 once again Cherubim are placed on the Ark of the Covenant, in Exodus 26:1, 31-33 images of Cherubim are placed all around the Tabernacle, and in Exodus 41 there's a long detailed description of a new temple with images of Cherubim carved all over the walls.
Iconography was present in Jewish synagogue worship prior to Christ as well, have you seen the Dura-Europos Synagogue? With walls covered in iconography? What about examining pre-Nicene Churches and caves? Once again walls covered in iconography.
To deny icons is to deny the incarnation, we can depict Christ because He came down in an incarnate state, as a man. If there is no issue depicting humans who lived in the past, why would we not be able to depict Christ's likeness as a man?
He thinks the Bible is iconoclastic, meaning he thinks depictions of Jesus are somehow sinful.
That's a youtube channel link not a video, had too much to drink lately?
https://youtube.com/@PatrickLancasterNewsToday
Watch this guys videos, real journalist in Ukraine exposing whats really going on. Ukraine is losing and they're entirely dependent on foreign aid.
https://youtube.com/@PatrickLancasterNewsToday
This guy is a real journalist whos in Ukraine covering what's actually going on down there. One of the videos where he's with Wagner shows that the Ukranians are totally dependent on western equipment, all of their equipment and weapons being left behind are American-styled and have instructions in English, Wagner units are saying the tanks they're fighting are also foreign aid.
NATO is fighting a proxy war.
The only "missing books" are the Deuterocanon from the Protestant reformation. 😉 ☦️
I like bible studies led by a Pastor who not only knows the bible, but also the historical background & customs of what was going on at the different times of the bible.
Have you tried reading the Fathers of the Church? Why not listen to the wisdom of those who were closest to Christ and the Apostles?
Having read Holy Scripture very carefully, you should also read the holy Fathers who interpret the Scriptures. You will receive no less delight from reading the Fathers than you do from the Scriptures. The Fathers develop the hidden meanings in Scripture and with their own writings help us to understand what we did not before.
— St. Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain
Right, which is why there is only one true form of Christianity. Orthodoxy!
What the earliest Christians believe is the same as what we believe. We have Apostolic Tradition and succession, the Church Fathers tell us the difference between the true Church and heretical sects is whether they have Apostolic Tradition and succession.
Which church gives the apocryphal books, the Catholic Church?
Again the Apocrypha is in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Greek Septuagint, the original KJV translation, and the original Canon given by the Church.
What is the one church you speak of?
The Orthodox Catholic Church. (not Roman Catholic)
Even the Bible speaks of multiple churches
This is basic word-concept fallacy, the word "church" does not mean one singe thing. It can refer to the universal Catholic Church, the spiritual body of the Church, the Church as a place of worship, and different jurisdictions of the Church. (Russian Orthodox Church, Antiochian, etc) In this case, when the Bible speaks of multiple "churches", it's talking about the same universal Catholic Church, but different locations or jurisdictions.
Not that they were off this out that flavor.
Actually that is how the Church functioned. If you weren't part of the Orthodox Catholic Church, you were separate from the Body of Christ.That's how the Church has always been understood since its founding.
There are lists in the Bible that talk about this, this is what makes up the core tenets of the Christian faith. It’s all derived out of the Bible.
Okay so show me where in the Bible it gives us the exhaustive list of what the Christian faith is and what makes a church true.
There’s one true church. But there are many churches today, some are true churches, some are not.
The Church has always been understood as being one Church, not multiple true Churches. If this is how the Church was understood for the first thousand years of its existence (and still in the Orthodox view) as being one, with one Faith and one set of belief, why would that change just because more sects are arising?
Things like Jesus is God, that there is a trinity. Things like salvation is from Jesus Christ and his death on the cross alone.
I agree that these are true, yes Jesus is God, yes there's the Trinity, yes we are ultimately saved by God's grace. However, my issue was that there is no exhaustive list of "core tenents" ever stated in Scripture, its entirely arbitrary.
Let's look at the apocryphal books. There were very few original copies made, they deny what the rest of the scriptures say,
The Apocrypha is part of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Greek Septuagint, and the original KJV translation, to say they deny the rest of the Scriptures isn't true whatsoever. The Apocrypha was never largely debated in the creation of the Canon of the Bible. We also have to recognize the fact that it was the Church who gave us the Canon, and they included the Apocrypha. So why is the Church correct about everything else in the Canon, but not the Apocrypha?
Read through the Bible a couple times. Listen to sermons about many parts of the Bible. Gain a fuller understanding of the texts.
One of my points is that when you separate the Bible from the Church, you can't understand the Bible correctly. Having incorrect Trinitarian theology will lead to having incorrect Christology, which will lead to having incorrect Soteriology. The mainstream Protestant view of salvation and the Crucifixion has a lot of nestorian and anti-trinitarian implications, and because they don't have correct Christology, it often leads to unitarianism.
People from different sects agreeing doesn't change the fact that there is no exhaustive list in Scripture of "core tenents" that a Church must follow to be true.
And in the Orthodox view, we don't appeal to textual critics and scholars to discern which doctrines are correct. We have the Councils for a reason, like the one in Acts 15. The idea of leaving it to "Bible pros" and textual scholars is an idea from the reformation. It's what led to the thousands of different denominations schisming and splitting from each other, its the reason we have to have this discussion.
Also you appeal to St. Augustine and Aquinas, but these people agree with me that there is only One True Church. The reason we have thousands of Protestant denominations in the first place is because we've separated Scripture from the Church and instead left it to textual critics and scholars.
But then we have to ask, what exactly are the core tenents? There are no "core tenents" listed in Scripture, this is something left up to an individual interpretation, which again doesn't solve the issue of how do we know whos interpretation is correct.
Yes, there are parts of the Bible that are black and white, love thy neighbor, take up your Cross and follow me, etc.
There are also parts of the Bible that are very theologically difficult, such as Triadology and Christology. An incorrect interpretation of Scripture on these is a direct gateway to atheism, gnosticism, arianism, nestorianism, unitarianism, etc.
There's also no such thing as "the true Churches", Scripture says there is one Church, one Faith, one Body, not multiple.
And one last thing to ask yourself: who do you think compiled the Bible? Why, the Church did through a series of Councils.
These differences are not clearly laid out, therefore each person may have their own interpretation. To more easily find like minded people, we may group ourselves to a certain denomination, that’s ok.
Actually it's not okay, because if anyone can make up their own interpretation, then how do you know the verses in Scripture mean what you think they mean? Where do you derive the basis for discerning what is true and untrue? If anyone can make up their own denomination, whats wrong with Mormons or Jehovahs Witnesses? By what means can you say their interpretation is incorrect? And how do you know what the "basics of the Gospel" are if it's just your own interpretation? Maybe I disagree with what you think the basics are, whos to say either is right or wrong?
The answer is the Church! And of course these differences are laid out, thats why the Church has councils like the Apostles did in the Apostolic times of the Church, look to Acts 15.
I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth
1 Timothy 3:15
All of what you said is correct, but what do you mean by separate church doctrines?
Jesus never said begin denominations or doctrines
While I 100% agree with the message you're conveying, that we shouldn't be spiteful or judging because of doctrinal differences, this is where you get it wrong.
Part of God's plan for man's salvation is the Church. Christ spoke of building and establishing His Church multiple times in the Gospels.
Multiple times in Scripture we see Paul talking about the laying on of hands, which is the appointing of successors and Bishops, which Christ gave the Apostles authority to do. There are Church Fathers and Saints mentioned by name in the Pauline epistles, Clement of Rome and Dionysius the Areopagite, who were Bishops in the Church appointed by the Apostles.
Jesus DID establish a Church, before the Gospels were written and the Bible was compiled, there was the Orthodox Catholic Church.
There isn't anywhere where this is said.