what differents are between Ortodox,Protestant,Catholic?

[secondboy]

hi. as you know I am a muslim.and I know a little about christianity.
in this thread i want to know what differents are between Ortodox,ProtestanT,Catholic?
i want to be familiar with Ortodox,Protestant and Catholic.
please help me.

 

[exoflare]

Basically, there was just “the Church” (not called Catholic with a capital C at that time because there was no need to differentiate it from another denomination yet) up until the 11th century.

In the 11th century came the schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches, which remains to this day.

In the 16th century you have the Reformation, or as I like to call it the “Deformation”, where Martin Luther and his followers broke away from the Catholic Church. At first he was just concerned with doing something about the practice that had developed about selling indulgences for money, and rightfully so. However, later on he started changing dogma, taking books out of the Bible, and calling the Pope the antichrist among other things. With all this he was excommunicated, and this uprising was the origin of the Protestant church(es) you see today.

 

[Elzee]

secondboy:

hi. as you know I am a muslim.and I know a little about christianity.
in this thread i want to know what differents are between Ortodox,ProtestanT,Catholic?
i want to be familiar with Ortodox,Protestant and Catholic.
please help me.

Hello! I hope and pray your search for knowledge leads you home to the Catholic Church one day. Keep asking questions. You will be in my prayers.

 

[BryPGuy89]

secondboy:

hi. as you know I am a muslim.and I know a little about christianity.
in this thread i want to know what differents are between Ortodox,ProtestanT,Catholic?
i want to be familiar with Ortodox,Protestant and Catholic.
please help me.

You got the history and I’m not sure if that is what you wanted. It sounded like you wanted to now why/what are their beleifs that make them so different and what not. Am I right.

If so then in a nut shell the Catholic Church was the original church estableshed by Jesus Christ. For centuries their teachings and beleifs were the only Christian beleifs in practice. These remain intact for the most part today. In the 11th century the schism, multiple pope claims, seperated the East and West basically. Many and most teachings are the same, but the Orthodox(east) does not look at the Pope as an authority figure.
Later in the 16th century Luther at first started because some people were abusing their powers and authority and he wanted justice. Later he started making up his own beleifs and rejecting Church teachings. This group that formed from him became the protestants. They now are as numerous as the grains of sand on a beach, there denomination at least. These groups divided and later created very different beleifs that are sometimes even contrary to Catholic beleifs. The term protestant refers to basically a Christian group that is not Orthodox or Catholic.

 

[secondboy]

I want to if all christians have one scripture or no?
whichever of them(ortodox,protestant,catholic) have different scriptures?

 

[Ignatius]

secondboy:

hi. as you know I am a muslim.and I know a little about christianity.
in this thread i want to know what differents are between Ortodox,ProtestanT,Catholic?
i want to be familiar with Ortodox,Protestant and Catholic.
please help me.

It’s kind of line the difference between the Shite and Sunni.

 

[Ghosty]

secondboy:

I want to if all christians have one scripture or no?
whichever of them(ortodox,protestant,catholic) have different scriptures?

All share the same Scriptures, but the Protestants took a few books out of theirs. The Orthodox and the Catholics are very, very similar. In fact, for the purposes of relation with outside religions you could consider them the same, IMO. Our difference is primarily organizational, though there is some theological nitpicking that occurs. Even now there is work on bringing us back together, and we have been united and seperated a few times in history.

Protestants are theologically VERY different from Catholic/Orthodox, and have a wide range of beliefs. There’s no such thing as “the Protestant” belief, as they have thousands of different ones. The Orthodox and Catholics trace their teachings back to the Apostles, and we call ourselves Apostolic Christians. Protestants trace themselves back to people in the 1500s who are considered heretics by all Apostolic Christians.

Before Islam, and long before the 1500s, the Apostolic Christians were the only ones around for the most part. If you get into a conversation with Protestants, understand that their teachings and beliefs do not go back to the Apostles, the Prophets and friends of Jesus who helped build the Church and wrote the New Testament Scriptures. The difference between Protestants and the Apostolic Christians is likely bigger than the difference between Shia and Sunni, and the difference between Catholic and Orthodox might be less than the difference between Shia and Sunni.

Peace and God bless!

 

[happygal]

Ghosty:

All share the same Scriptures, but the Protestants took a few books out of theirs. The Orthodox and the Catholics are very, very similar. In fact, for the purposes of relation with outside religions you could consider them the same, IMO. Our difference is primarily organizational, though there is some theological nitpicking that occurs. Even now there is work on bringing us back together, and we have been united and seperated a few times in history.

Protestants are theologically VERY different from Catholic/Orthodox, and have a wide range of beliefs. There’s no such thing as “the Protestant” belief, as they have thousands of different ones. The Orthodox and Catholics trace their teachings back to the Apostles, and we call ourselves Apostolic Christians. Protestants trace themselves back to people in the 1500s who are considered heretics by all Apostolic Christians.

Before Islam, and long before the 1500s, the Apostolic Christians were the only ones around for the most part. If you get into a conversation with Protestants, understand that their teachings and beliefs do not go back to the Apostles, the Prophets and friends of Jesus who helped build the Church and wrote the New Testament Scriptures. The difference between Protestants and the Apostolic Christians is likely bigger than the difference between Shia and Sunni, and the difference between Catholic and Orthodox might be less than the difference between Shia and Sunni.

Peace and God bless!

I do know the orthodox and catholic are almost the same, but the question is why they cannot see eye to eye with catholic…this is one big question which i really don’t know. If’ i’m not wrong Russian who have the most orthodox practise does not allow priest to enter their country to share gospel…!!! So can anyone englighten?

 

[Aluuvian]

You got the history and I’m not sure if that is what you wanted. It sounded like you wanted to now why/what are their beleifs that make them so different and what not. Am I right.

If so then in a nut shell the Catholic Church was the original church estableshed by Jesus Christ. For centuries their teachings and beleifs were the only Christian beleifs in practice. These remain intact for the most part today. In the 11th century the schism, multiple pope claims, seperated the East and West basically. Many and most teachings are the same, but the Orthodox(east) does not look at the Pope as an authority figure.
Later in the 16th century Luther at first started because some people were abusing their powers and authority and he wanted justice. Later he started making up his own beleifs and rejecting Church teachings. This group that formed from him became the protestants. They now are as numerous as the grains of sand on a beach, there denomination at least. These groups divided and later created very different beleifs that are sometimes even contrary to Catholic beleifs. The term protestant refers to basically a Christian group that is not Orthodox or Catholic.

Stop talking about something you obviously dont have clue about.

The Orthodox Church was founded on the Day of Holy Pentecost in Jerusalem in 33 AD, fifty days after the Holy Resurrection of Jesus Christ our true God. It has preserved the original teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles form that time until the present. The first major Bishops of the Church (known as Patriarchs) have remained Orthodox up to the present. They are the Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople.

Yes, the Roman Catholic Church was a part of the Orthodox Church, believing and teaching the same doctrines and Sacred Tradition, until 1054.** It was the Roman Catholic Church that broke away from the Orthodox Church.** In that year the Patriarch of Rome, or the bishop of Rome, also known as the Pope of Rome broke away from the original Church by making unacceptable claims of authority over the entire Christian Church. Since then, the Roman Catholic Church has added new teachings, which the ancient Christian Church above rejects. One of these is the Doctrine of the Infallibility of the Pope. Not only this doctrine but also other matters of the faith have developed within the Roman Catholic Church which has since has separated both these Churches.

What separates the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church is not only the Primacy of the Pope also known as the Infallibility, but also the following innovations of the Roman Catholic Church: The Procession of the Holy Spirit. Purgatory and indulgences. The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. Assumption of the Virgin Mary. Invocation of the epiclesis. Unleavened Bread. Holy Communion. Divorce. Clergy’s Martal Status.

All Churches contain an element of the truth preserved by the “One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,” but only the Orthodox Church has preserved and perpetuated the entire Christian Faith of the Ancient Church, based on the Sacred Scriptures and Sacred Tradition and the First Seven Ecumenical Councils.

 

[Hellisreal]

Aluuvian’s first post here and the charity level of the first sentence is lacking.
:nope: Not very nice to see.

Welcome to **Catholic Answers **forums Mr. Aluuvian.
We are all guests here.

 

[Atreyu]

Stop talking about something you obviously dont have clue about.

The Orthodox Church was founded on the Day of Holy Pentecost in Jerusalem in 33 AD, fifty days after the Holy Resurrection of Jesus Christ our true God. It has preserved the original teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles form that time until the present. The first major Bishops of the Church (known as Patriarchs) have remained Orthodox up to the present. They are the Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople.

Yes, the Roman Catholic Church was a part of the Orthodox Church, believing and teaching the same doctrines and Sacred Tradition, until 1054.** It was the Roman Catholic Church that broke away from the Orthodox Church.** In that year the Patriarch of Rome, or the bishop of Rome, also known as the Pope of Rome broke away from the original Church by making unacceptable claims of authority over the entire Christian Church. Since then, the Roman Catholic Church has added new teachings, which the ancient Christian Church above rejects. One of these is the Doctrine of the Infallibility of the Pope. Not only this doctrine but also other matters of the faith have developed within the Roman Catholic Church which has since has separated both these Churches.

What separates the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church is not only the Primacy of the Pope also known as the Infallibility, but also the following innovations of the Roman Catholic Church: The Procession of the Holy Spirit. Purgatory and indulgences. The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary. Assumption of the Virgin Mary. Invocation of the epiclesis. Unleavened Bread. Holy Communion. Divorce. Clergy’s Martal Status.

All Churches contain an element of the truth preserved by the “One Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,” but only the Orthodox Church has preserved and perpetuated the entire Christian Faith of the Ancient Church, based on the Sacred Scriptures and Sacred Tradition and the First Seven Ecumenical Councils.

Perhaps we could say that the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches broke away from each other in around the year 1054?

I agree with most of what you say, but there is something a bit curious. You mention unleavened bread as an unacceptable innovation. First of all, this was no post-11th century innovation! Secondly, can you please tell me why it was acceptable for the Eastern Orthodox to be in Communion with the Catholic Church for the first thousand years, during which the Catholic Church constantly used unleavened bread in the Eucharist, but then suddenly it was unacceptable?

You believe in the procession of the Holy Spirit too, by the way (or do you not say in the Nicene Creed: “I believe in the Holy Spirit… who proceeds from the father”?). And the split in 1054 had very little to do explicitly with the Primacy of the bishop of Rome. And you’ve ignored the existence of the Oriental Orthodox Churches and their Patriarchs.

 

[BrandenRush]

hi. as you know I am a muslim.and I know a little about christianity.
in this thread i want to know what differents are between Ortodox,ProtestanT,Catholic?
i want to be familiar with Ortodox,Protestant and Catholic.
please help me.

When you speak of Protestants, you are speaking of many different beliefs and denominations. They are all Protestant because they broke from the Catholic church at some point.

 

[paarsurrey]

Hi
Now you see, even if one decides to become say a Christians, the next step to choose from ,as I am told here, 60000+ denominations.
How cumbersome it is?
So, if you people are any serious about converting non-Catholics to Catholics then, make some or most sacrifices to combine all Christian denominations into one United Christendom.
Is it sinful to unite?
Thanks

The first and primary source on “Jesus did not die on Cross” - rather Jesus was not killed on Cross and later died naturally is the pristine Word of God revealed on the PromisedMessiahImamMahdi 1835-1908.

 

[Syele]

Hi
Now you see, even if one decides to become say a Christians, the next step to choose from ,as I am told here, 60000+ denominations.
How cumbersome it is?
So, if you people are any serious about converting non-Catholics to Catholics then, make some or most sacrifices to combine all Christian denominations into one United Christendom.
Is it sinful to unite?
Thanks

There aren’t 60000 denominations. Catholics like to say that cause they like to say they are one and we are 60000. They have no way to back such a thing up. the only source for it is dubious at best. I can claim there are 3000 Catholic denominations but it won’t make it accurate. Of course it is not sinful to unite. the problem is that people are human and stubbornly refuse to agree, this problem is not unique to Christianity.

 

[Cliff01]

Aluuvian gave a good explanation and you should understand the situation fairly, but no better could you then when you read the book your self - bible.com is a
good start. All churches use the same bible and bases, but the all made changes, added this and that, chiefly the Roman Catholics, who added lines to the words spoken and changed lines etc. But the bible is by far the same with all the churches.

If you want to understand the churches and their differences you must first know/understnad human nature.

We each learn differently: visually, orally, practically, and all thos are employed in a course.

It is the same in christianity as God intended it this way. When he said to
Peter ‘upon this rock I shall build my church’ he meant to place peter as leader of the apostles, whom all formed his church - and they were all different churches:
evangelist Paul, Peter to the church and Mark to the orthodox church, preachers and ministers Thomas etc.

You must understand that thus is mankind and god knew
it and gave each an environment to worship him in. What he does like is the violations of the churches and the changes they made - the Roman Catholics namely
whom he refers to as ‘The whore that sits upon the seven mountains’ referring to the vatican which is build on seven mountains - see the revelation and the
nicholations ( Roman Cat.)

The christian churches therefore should not confuse you for thus God wants it; because as long as you bide by the bible, his teachings, you are in his favour. So,
really, you must read the bible first. Start with the new testament, if you wish, the story of the christians.

And…jesus actually did say that we need not join any church to worship god as god is a spirit and we should worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:20-25

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Perhaps we could say that the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches broke away from each other in around the year 1054?

First, congratulations and many years! (your sig).

I agree with most of what you say, but there is something a bit curious. You mention unleavened bread as an unacceptable innovation. First of all, this was no post-11th century innovation! Secondly, can you please tell me why it was acceptable for the Eastern Orthodox to be in Communion with the Catholic Church for the first thousand years, during which the Catholic Church constantly used unleavened bread in the Eucharist, but then suddenly it was unacceptable?

I’ve seen proof that the unleavened bread is preschism, but none that it has been always the practice in the West. With the constant traffic of Eastern Christians West (St. Iranaeus, for instance was from Asia), this is highly unlikely.

The earliest evidence of the practice is Armenian, and that’s post Chalcedon.

I’m not dogmatic about leaven, btw, and have communed from the Armenians in Syria.

You believe in the procession of the Holy Spirit too, by the way (or do you not say in the Nicene Creed: “I believe in the Holy Spirit… who proceeds from the father”?). And the split in 1054 had very little to do explicitly with the Primacy of the bishop of Rome.

It all boils down to that.

And you’ve ignored the existence of the Oriental Orthodox Churches and their Patriarchs.

I’ve noticed he hasn’t been the only one.

It would help if I knew what sect the OP was. I could tailor an answer.

In general, if you aren’t Catholic (Latin or Orthodox) you’re Protestant.

If you hold to the Ecumenical Councils, you’re Orthdoox.

If you add the infallibility and supremacy of the pope of Rome (and all that comes with it), you’re Latin.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

First post, eh?

Aluuvian gave a good explanation and you should understand the situation fairly, but no better could you then when you read the book your self - bible.com is a
good start. All churches use the same bible and bases, but the all made changes, added this and that, chiefly the Roman Catholics, who added lines to the words spoken and changed lines etc. But the bible is by far the same with all the churches.

If anything, the Protestants deleted something (the Deuterocanonicals, which the Apostles accepted).

The Bible, is for all intents and purposes, the same.

If you want to understand the churches and their differences you must first know/understnad human nature.

We each learn differently: visually, orally, practically, and all thos are employed in a course.

It is the same in christianity as God intended it this way. When he said to
Peter ‘upon this rock I shall build my church’ he meant to place peter as leader of the apostles, whom all formed his church - and they were all different churches:
evangelist Paul, Peter to the church and Mark to the orthodox church, preachers and ministers Thomas etc.

Nonsense.

Acts 2:1 Now when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all with one accord in one place

You must understand that thus is mankind and god knew
it and gave each an environment to worship him in. What he does like is the violations of the churches and the changes they made - the Roman Catholics namely
whom he refers to as ‘The whore that sits upon the seven mountains’ referring to the vatican which is build on seven mountains - see the revelation and the
nicholations ( Roman Cat.)

As much as I dislike ultarmontanism, this is nonsense. The reference is to the pagan Roman emperors. Vatican Hill is NOT one of the Seven Hills of Rome. See your history. At the time Revelation was written, Vatican Hill was still outside Rome.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Rome

The christian churches therefore should not confuse you for thus God wants it; because as long as you bide by the bible, his teachings, you are in his favour. So,
really, you must read the bible first. Start with the new testament, if you wish, the story of the christians.

Start with St. Luke, it would be the most familiar to muslims.

And…jesus actually did say that we need not join any church to worship god as god is a spirit and we should worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:20-25

Try again:

Luke 10:16 Whoever listens to you listens to Me, and whoever rejects you rejects Me. Whoever rejects Me rejects Him who sent He."

Matthew 18:17-8 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. I solemnly tell you that whatever you as a Church bind on earth will in Heaven be held as bound, and whatever you loose on earth will in Heaven be held to be loosed.

 

[Cliff01]

Nonsense.

Quote: Acts 2:1 Now when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all with one accord in one place.

The one accord means ‘of one spirit’, all agreed that christ was the messia and u may be in rome and I in Israel but we are yet of ‘one accord on christ’. All agreed to preach the gospel, even if they must die. Which is all that that Jesus means to say here.

Quote: As much as I dislike ultarmontanism, this is nonsense. The reference is to the pagan Roman emperors. Vatican Hill is NOT one of the Seven Hills of Rome. See your history. At the time Revelation was written, Vatican Hill was still outside Rome.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Rome

So where is that pagan church then??? Is god mad? Where is that whore, the Nicolations? Your link confirms that at the time of the revelations the city of rome was referred to as the city of the seven mountains. Indeed the vatican is by the seven mountains and is commonly referred to as on the seven mountains. If not, where is that church of the Nicholatians who changed his ordinances according to him?..in rome perhaps?

I wrote: And…jesus actually did say that we need not join any church to worship god as god is a spirit and we should worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:20-25

Try again:

Quote: Luke 10:16 Whoever listens to you listens to Me, and whoever rejects you rejects Me. Whoever rejects Me rejects Him who sent He."

Quote: Matthew 18:17-8 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. I solemnly tell you that whatever you as a Church bind on earth will in Heaven be held as bound, and whatever you loose on earth will in Heaven be held to be loosed.

Indeed: so you, no doubt, can read - if you could only understand a bit better. They did bind the true story of the Gospel on earth and we do read it. It is in a book called the bible, and we can listen to their writings at home and need not any minister to read for us as we can all read today, the fast majority of us, anyway. And remember: ‘you as a church’ means all apostels, each in thier church, one in spirit, with christ and the gospel, however far apart from eachother - still they are one in spirit.

Let the wise speak so that short in understanding may learn.
C.B

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Nonsense

Indeed: so you, no doubt, can read

Yes, I can read.

Unlike the vast majority of Christians (including those that the Apostles preached to)

• if you could only understand a bit better.

You didn’t read the warning label:

II Peter 3:15 So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability.

They did bind the true story of the Gospel on earth

Very inventive. Has no context in the Bible to support it, but clever.

Ah, the problem you have. All those people who “bound” the Bible all believed in Church, bishops, Tradition, etc. until 1517 and unless you have a first edition somewhere, all those manuscripts you use were copied by Orthodox and Latins (there are some Arian manuscripts, but since they also believed in bishops, church etc, that isn’t going to help you). How do you know they didn’t get it wrong?

and we do read it.

and some of us with understanding.

It is in a book called the bible,

and who told you what was in it, as it didn’t come with a table of contexts, and their were many false Gospels and Epistles out there.

and we can listen to their writings at home and need not any minister to read for us as we can all read today, the fast majority of us, anyway.

The Ethiopian eunuch (Acts:30) was “reading Isaiah the prophet, and” Phillip “asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?””
(Acts 13)27 For those who live in Jerusalem and their rulers, because they did not recognize him **nor understand **the utterances of the prophets which are read every sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning him."

And remember: ‘you as a church’ means all apostels, each in thier church, one in spirit, with christ and the gospel, however far apart from eachother - still they are one in spirit.

Yes, and now their successors the bishops.

Let the wise speak so that short in understanding may learn.
C.B

I Corinthians 10:12 Therefore let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall.