Hi,
A lot of evangelical fundamentalists believe in this idea called the "RAPTURE". What is it? What does it suggest?
I think it has something to do about the end times, but its quite unclear.
If you have any understanding of this, please feel free to share.
Thanks
Comments
there is a fair amount of information on this subject on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapture
with more details down the page
GBU
Pray for me
Lostsinner
Rapture is the idea that at the end the good people are gathered for the judgement and the bad people have to suffer i think thats on the right track and if im not mistaken i think us Copts also believe in it also
Pray for me
Lostsinner
Thanks. What about the association with this and Israel? Apparently those who subscribe to the Rapture idea, acquired this from scripture. Also, as far as I can see, they somehow contest that every Christian must promote zionism to be saved. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was the notion I seemed to have.
[quote author=Lostsinner link=topic=7520.msg99029#msg99029 date=1231180285]
Rapture is the idea that at the end the good people are gathered for the judgement and the bad people have to suffer i think thats on the right track and if im not mistaken i think us Copts also believe in it also
Pray for me
Lostsinner
Thanks. What about the association with this and Israel? Apparently those who subscribe to the Rapture idea, acquired this from scripture. Also, as far as I can see, they somehow contest that every Christian must promote zionism to be saved. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was the notion I seemed to have.
some do but i do not
I am a progressive Dispensationalist which means that i belive that Isriel and the Church are in the same covenant but that they remain seperate in identity (for more information see Dispensationalsim, Isriel and the Church it is a book by the profs at Dallas Theological Seminary)
the rapture happens (as i belive) before the tribulation period (note i do not agree with some of the things stated in the left behind books they are fiction!! it is better for you to read a theological book rather than a fiction book) this means that i am pretribulational I am also a premillenial (there are amillenialsts who explain away the litteral rule of Christ on earth)
endorsing Isriel is not nessisary for salvation (Faith alone in Christ alone! as the protestant reformers said) however it is important that Isriel is a nation and you have to understand what paul means in Romans 11 this chapter is key to understanding the relationship between Isriel and the church
i am vary interusted in what the Coptic Church has to say on the issue of the end times
NESS<><
We await the final coming of the Lord on the CLOUDS, when the last trumpet will sound and the general ressurection and last judgement will take place.
You may want to read this book on Revelation by Fr Tadros, it's an orthodox patristic commentary that you may find usefull: Revelation
From page 219 and further it discusses the millennium!
[quote author=QT_PA_2T link=topic=7520.msg99038#msg99038 date=1231198555]
[quote author=Lostsinner link=topic=7520.msg99029#msg99029 date=1231180285]
Rapture is the idea that at the end the good people are gathered for the judgement and the bad people have to suffer i think thats on the right track and if im not mistaken i think us Copts also believe in it also
Pray for me
Lostsinner
Thanks. What about the association with this and Israel? Apparently those who subscribe to the Rapture idea, acquired this from scripture. Also, as far as I can see, they somehow contest that every Christian must promote zionism to be saved. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was the notion I seemed to have.
some do but i do not
I am a progressive Dispensationalist which means that i belive that Isriel and the Church are in the same covenant but that they remain seperate in identity (for more information see Dispensationalsim, Isriel and the Church it is a book by the profs at Dallas Theological Seminary)
the rapture happens (as i belive) before the tribulation period (note i do not agree with some of the things stated in the left behind books they are fiction!! it is better for you to read a theological book rather than a fiction book) this means that i am pretribulational I am also a premillenial (there are amillenialsts who explain away the litteral rule of Christ on earth)
endorsing Isriel is not nessisary for salvation (Faith alone in Christ alone! as the protestant reformers said) however it is important that Isriel is a nation and you have to understand what paul means in Romans 11 this chapter is key to understanding the relationship between Isriel and the church
i am vary interusted in what the Coptic Church has to say on the issue of the end times
NESS<><
Excuse me NESS, but Dispensionalism is ONLY being promoted by Evangelical Christians who happen to be in texas. This has nothing to do with Orthodox Christianity. These evangelical Christians are causing HAVOC. The baptists and the Roman Catholics are uniting against them. There are seminaries that they hold where they try and "put things straight".
You then are fervent supporter of John Hagee and Pat Robertson??
on the other hand i do agree with you that some are bad (that is why i am a progressive ther is a diffrence!)
were did you find out that baptists and catholics unite? no i am not a supporter of pat or hegan remember i said progressive they are part of a cult called the ultradispensationalsts and they belive in herrisy that the sermon on the mt does not apply to christians
NESS<><
dont display your ignorance Baptists are dispensationalists and dispensationalism is a transdenominational systematic theology and is not limited to any state or church
on the other hand i do agree with you that some are bad (that is why i am a progressive ther is a diffrence!)
were did you find out that baptists and catholics unite?
NESS<><
Firstly, I see nothing wrong with asking. The question itself shows I am trying to understand this issue. Secondly, the only thing I know so far is that dispensionalism IS only taught by Evangelicals who promote Zionism. Not all baptists are dispensionalists and not all evangelicals are also.
Basically, at the end of the day, the problem i've seen is that dispensionalism promotes zionism.
Here: read this. Its an answer from a baptist theologian against Zionism:
http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/ByDate/2004/165_Israel_Palestine_and_the_Middle_East/
In fact, if you are unaware about the huge movement there is to correct this heresy, I can forward you the link (of Baptist and Other denominations who have put together a statement expressing that zionism is wrong. Theologically, it is incorrect).
It just seems obvious to me that dispensionalism promotes & supports zionism, which, with all due respect, is not only ignorant, but dangerous.
Christians are calling it heretical because of the damage it has done when used in this way! Dispensionalism is OK (as far as I can see), but people shouldn't go around promoting un-Christian and dogmatically heretical ideologies such as Zionism so that Christ comes faster!!! I think they will be judged. I'm glad that you see them as incorrect. That's a good thing.
Do you see what I meant now when I said dispensionalism promotes zionism? Well, put it this way, John Hagee and Robertson and MANY others from texas have used dispensionalism to promote zionsim. It was wrong to suggest that ALL dispensionalists promote zionism, but dispensionalism is being taught from any seminary or theological school in Texas, i would be VERY MUCH cautious. They seem to have their own Agenda
I want to make this clear, MY PRIEST told me that we DO NOT believe in the rapture, as a matter of fact the idea came from one guy by taking two verses out of different books of the bible and combining them. THIS IS NOT RIGHT.
Thanks! Just convince that to NESS
any way i posted this tread a long time ago / i havent even been on this site for a long time ...
i think my thoughts have changed on this particular issue
when i posted this thread i just wanted some feed back and looking for what the Coptic church teaches
NESS<><
If i have offended anyone forgive me, and if anyone insulted you forgive them.
Pray for me, and may God help us to grow more in the knowledge of the ONE TRUE GOD.
if i was i would have sent u a pm confronting u privatly :)
any way... no i am vary interusted in what other people are thinking about the Last days the study of Daniel and Revelation and all that good stuff
NESS<><
I also find it interesting that St. Paul reminds to stand up and face the coming tribulations with boldness in Christ, and let's not even go into what Sts. Polycarp, Ignatius Antioch, Clement of Alexandria, and St. Basil said about the eventual Tribulation... nothing about Christians being taken up beforehand, only that we must endure.
I must emphasize, this "rapture" doctrine is not even 150 years old and even among any self-respecting evangelical Protestant scholar/theologian today, the doctrine of the rapture is not something to take seriously. TEAM, for example, an evangelical mission organizaton, used to strongly hold in their statement of faith the doctrine of the rapture, until they were strongly encouraged to drop that doctrine because it really has no Biblical basis whatsoever--a guy taking a verse from Daniel, a couple from 2 Thess, and the Revelation and making a Satanic nightmare for Christians, and subsequently turning our loving and gracious God into a sadistic monster in the eyes of the non-Believers, this hardly qualifies as a doctrine that is anything inline with Scriptural Truth about Jesus Christ our Lord, God, and Savior, and especially not about His Glorious and Terrible Second Coming.
Ignatious
papias
Justin martyr
Aviricius Marcellus
Tertullian
Clement of Alexandria
Hippolytus
Cyprian
Nepos
Coracion
Lactantius
Commodianus
NESS<><
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php?topic=8620.msg108700#msg108700
http://tasbeha.org/content/community/index.php?topic=8620.msg108719#msg108719
GBU
some do but i do not
I am a progressive Dispensationalist which means that i belive that Isriel and the Church are in the same covenant but that they remain seperate in identity (for more information see Dispensationalsim, Isriel and the Church it is a book by the profs at Dallas Theological Seminary)
the rapture happens (as i belive) before the tribulation period (note i do not agree with some of the things stated in the left behind books they are fiction!! it is better for you to read a theological book rather than a fiction book) this means that i am pretribulational I am also a premillenial (there are amillenialsts who explain away the litteral rule of Christ on earth)
endorsing Isriel is not nessisary for salvation (Faith alone in Christ alone! as the protestant reformers said) however it is important that Isriel is a nation and you have to understand what paul means in Romans 11 this chapter is key to understanding the relationship between Isriel and the church
i am vary interusted in what the Coptic Church has to say on the issue of the end times
NESS<><
Dear Ness55
I am very interested with your writing since I am ignorant in regard to some of your ideas. To be honest I have no idea what ‘progressive Dispensationalist’ is and it is the first time I am hearing of it. I don’t think I would be the best person to say anything about it.
However, I can share with you what the Orthodox Church teaches about the tribulations at the last day and the rupture. We believe that the tribulations precede the rupture unlike the Protestants. (I am not even sure if there is any rupture at all) If you read Matthew 24 you will have some idea about these matters. In Matthew 24 Jesus warns the believers about the challenges they will face, from imprisonment and rumors of war to death, before His second coming. How is that, believers will suffer these tribulations if they have already been ruptured as some of our Protestant brethrens teach? It clearly says “If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.” Matthew 24:22.
Ness55 another issue I want to address is that of ‘Sola fide’ (faith alone) that you mentioned in your post. This doctrine was introduced into the Protestant church when Martin Luther was reading Roman 5:2 “Therefore, since we have been made right in God’s sight by faith, we have peace with God because of what Jesus Christ our Lord has done for us.” Martin Luther took this verse and added it to ‘alone’. So, it becomes ‘in faith alone’. Nowhere in the bible would you find ‘faith’ and ‘alone’ written together. St. Paul in Corinthians 13:13 didn’t say “One thing will last forever—faith”. What he said was “Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love.”
Since I am digressing from the main topic I will stop here. If you want to discuss more about the doctrine of ‘faith alone’ we can always start a new trend.
In Christ
Theophilus
are any of these pple church Fathers
Ignatious
papias
Justin martyr
Aviricius Marcellus
Tertullian
Clement of Alexandria
Hippolytus
Cyprian
Nepos
Coracion
Lactantius
Commodianus
NESS<><
St. Ignatius of Antioch, yes.
St. Justin Martyr, yes.
St. Clement of Alexandria, yes.
St. Cyprian of... ? There are lots of Church Fathers and Saints named Cyprian.
The rest, no. Tertullian is sometimes, for academic purposes, considered to be a father of the Church, but not a Father (note the difference in size of the "f") of the Church. Tertullian succumbed to the heresy of Montantism, which looks a lot like some forms of Pentecostalism, only a little more weird. Tertullian was a God-fearing man, but not a Saint because of his ascription to heresy. His writings should not read with the same weight as the True Fathers of the Church. And Origen, he is a theological laughing stock among the Fathers of the Church. He had much good to give the Church, but his teachings were not quite Orthodox.
Hi,
A lot of evangelical fundamentalists believe in this idea called the "RAPTURE". What is it? What does it suggest?
I think it has something to do about the end times, but its quite unclear.
If you have any understanding of this, please feel free to share.
Thanks
This was first started in the mid 1800's by John Darby, who made several false predictions on the end of the world. It is also called dispensationalism and is mixed in with the heresy of Chilliasm, which as I said before in a previous post, is accepted by the vast majority, if not all, protestant denominations. This "rapture" was translated from the greek word apostacia, meaning a departure from, I believe this verse is in Thessalonians where St. Paul speaks of us being caught up in the clouds. Darby took that verse and created a very elaborate belief now called "rapture". The major problem with this is that it teaches that we escape tribulations which is very clear that we will be here, the days will be cut short that even the elect might be deceived. So when the antichrist comes proclaiming himself to be God, mass amounts of protestants, and any others that believe this heresy, will be deceived. They will be thinking that this is Christ come to "rapture" them away. Because he and the false prophet will be showing many signs and wonders they will believe. I do think a great number of Orthodox will be deceived as we see the heresies of other denominations being mixed in with the true church, and other silencing them for pointing it out.
This also is a good reason I am against ecumenism. From the WCC's own website "WCC's Faith and Order Commission has been successful in working toward consensus on Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry, on the date of Easter, on the nature and purpose of the church (ecclesiology), and on ecumenical hermeneutics." Also 1.2Through the WCC the churches have worked together, reflected together and worshipped together." http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/3-preparatory-and-background-documents/common-understanding-and-vision-of-the-wcc-cuv.html) Worship together? This is acceptance of heretical worship which makes Orthodox truth relative, meaningless. For the antichrist to come the political, economic (which we can clearly see happening), and religious systems need to be in unity. This ecumenical unity is mixed as of iron and clay, just as in the dream Daniel interpreted. I want everyone to know that I am not angry while posting this and have nothing against any person, I am direct and that tends to be misunderstood. Hopefully this is helpful even though I kind of went into a tangent.
If we are going to make sweeping accusations agsinst this organisation then we must be aware that they will also fall upon our beloved Arch-Pastor.
I spent a very happy week at the WCC headquarters in Geneva, and although there were many issues where the other participants in the conference I attended were plain wrong, nevertheless I was rather humbled by their faith in Christ in some of the most difficult circumstances - many were from countries were no Orthodox people have been willing to go and share their Faith.
The WCC is not a super-Church, it is an international organisation much like the national and local Councils of Churches. His Grace Bishop Angaelos is a senior member of the Churches Together in England organisation fopr instance, as is His Grace Bishop Anthony. The WCC makes many mistakes and is usually pre-occupied with politics and social action, I do not agree with most of what they seem to think is most important.
But if His Holiness is willing to be a leader of the organisation, and Patriarch Paulos is a leader, and the Catholics Aram is a moderator, and all of the Orthodox bishops I know in the UK are members and leaders of such organisations, then I think it is appropriate to be hesitant in making sweeping condemnations.
His Holiness, no more than I, believes that Orthodoxy is relative, but protestantism is relative, and with a positive witness it can become relatively more Orthodox. This may not satisfy your own thoughts about Orthodoxy - I also am not speaking out of anger but openly - but this is the path that our Patriarch believes is worth pursuing.
Father Peter
As I stated in my previous post the path is being paved for the antichrist. The need for unity is clear, to make it easier for him to tighten his grip, consolidate his power. I totally understand the desire to share our faith and hopefully people will choose Orthodoxy. I do not want to see our church watered down so to speak, and I see this potential in the WCC, the whole ecumenical movement actually. As humans we tend to take the path of least resistance, and as we are being bombarded with more temptations, delusions, and lies people will abandon truth for something easier. St. Augustine refers to the antichrist as "The monkey of Christ", this rings true in just about everything related to Christ. There is the Gospel of Christ, and the false Gospel. There is Holy Iconography of God, then there is the iconography of the devil. For every thing holy there is an opposite evil, much more seductive, playing to our sinful nature. There is the true church of Christ, and there is an evil opposite. It masks itself as Christian, but at its core it is rotten. It constantly attacks our church in several ways. Sometimes it slanders her, somtimes it seeks her approval by flattering words and trickery. This may be understood as a "sweeping statement" or paranoia, accusatory etc. I assure you this is not from anger but from love. We must be vigilant and watch for the signs of the times. Ecumenism and Rapture/Dispensationalism in my opinion very damaging or potentially damaging to our church over time.
What is your opinion then of His Holiness and our bishops who do pray with those outside our Orthodox Church, including Protestants, Roman Catholics and Byzantines?
Father Peter
Ioannes,
What is your opinion then of His Holiness and our bishops who do pray with those outside our Orthodox Church, including Protestants, Roman Catholics and Byzantines?
Father Peter
Well the apostolic canons speak for themselves Fr. Peter, again these are not of my own accord as I rely on the early church fathers as much as possible. Canon XLV "Let a bishop,presbyter,or deacon, who has prayed with heretics be excommunicated: but if he has permitted to perform any clerical office, let him be deposed." I guess it boils down to interpretation really. Are they heretics or are they not? I think it would be a good idea to refer to St John Chrysostom again on his discourses against the Judaizing Christians. Apparently many people thought it alright to pray,worship, and celebrate with Jews, after all we worship the same God right? Not according to St John Chrysostom. I also do not think it is wrong to disagree with our bishops, of course as long as it is done properly. I would say I respectfully disagree with any Orthodox praying with non-Orthodox. This is particularly hard for me as all of my family are protestant, and the worst kind, evangelical. Those that believe that they need to establish one united church before Christ can rapture them, I think this is mostly under Vineyard ministries like Joyce Meyer and Joe Osteen type people.
I dont mean to write such lengthy posts, but I hope people can see where I am coming from. I am not basing this off of personal opinions or grudges I may have. I am merely doing what I can to defend my church, so if I kept quiet because it may offend a Bishop or Priest how can I apologize? Should I not put the church above those she gives those titles to? In short, I would not call any of our Bishops nor Pope Shenouda "heretics" for praying with other denominations but I definetly do not agree with it nor do I think it is right. Also sorry for deviating from the original topic, but on the otherhand it is always nice to see how these conversations evolve.
One last point about ecumenism. I see how liberalism has infected everything to the point where we have to tip toe around certain words or things we do as to not offend someone with a different belief or has a different lifestyle. If you pay close attention, anyone who say does not believe that global warming is a result of man, they are looked at as loons, discriminated against for their belief. If you say anything against homosexuality it is the same thing, you are branded then outcasted. I do not want to see this mentality infect our church through the agenda of the WCC, to unite all churches. Eventually anyone who disagrees will be silenced. Just reading http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/3-preparatory-and-background-documents/common-understanding-and-vision-of-the-wcc-cuv.html anyone can see their agenda is clear and their wording is scary.
Is there another way of reading your post? Have I misread it?
Do you believe that our Orthodox Church should be engaged in ecumenical dialogue with the Byzantine Church while it continues to accept Chalcedon as an ecumenical Council? Indeed do you believe that the Byzantine community is a Church, or a seat of Satan? The Byzantine community has not been part of our Orthodox Church for 1500 years, and has held a variety of positions which our Fathers and councils have condemned as heretical. Are they therefore, in your opinion, part of the Church or not?
Father Peter
Do you think it is possible that you, as a layman, might have misunderstood what the Holy Spirit requires of the Church in these days?
I was also been full of zeal when I first converted to Orthodoxy, and shared some of the same views as you do, but I realised that I was not the interpreter of the faith, and that I had patriarchs, bishops and priests who were true fathers in Christ. There are indeed things to be concerned about in all Orthodox communities, but it seems to me that any Orthodox Christian is on uncertain ground when they condemn their Patriarch, bishops and priests for things which they say warrant deposition and excommunication based only on their own reading of Church documents. This is how some of the Byzantine Churches have splintered into many small groups each insisting they alone are the Really True, More Than the Others, Orthodox Church.
You keep referring to St John Chrysostom's writing against those who prayed with Jews. It is not at all clear to me that His Holiness praying with Pope Paul VI is the same as praying with Jews. Clearly the God of the Roman Catholics is the same as that of our Orthodox Church.
His Holiness Pope Shenouda has said on his meeting with Pope Paul VI..
We have met in the desire to deepen the relations between our Churches and to find concrete ways to overcome the obstacles in the way of our real cooperation in the service of our Lord Jesus Christ who has given us the ministry of reconciliation, to reconcile the world to Himself.
...
We have, to a large degree, the same understanding of the Church, founded upon the Apostles, and of the important role of ecumenical and local councils.
...
We humbly recognize that our Churches are not able to give more perfect witness to this new life in Christ because of existing divisions which have behind them centuries of difficult history. In fact, since the year 451 A.D., theological differences, nourished and widened by non- theological factors, have sprung up. These differences cannot be ignored. In spite of them, however, we are rediscovering ourselves as Churches with a common inheritance and are reaching out with determination and confidence in the Lord to achieve the fullness and perfection of that unity which is His gift.
This is the same opinion I have. It is the opinion of His Holiness, of the bishops of the Coptic Orthodox Church and of all of her priests as far as I am aware. There is a clear recognition of difference, and of division, but also a clear recognition that the Roman Catholic Church is a Christian community. I see no relativism here. His Holiness does not say that Roman Catholic teaching is the same as our Orthodox Faith, but that there is a great deal of common ground, and that the Roman Catholic community is not at all the same as those of another religion.
I do urge you to reflect on the ecumenical activity of all of our Orthodox Churches and fathers and consider whether the view you have developed is consistent with their leadership of the Church, and if it is not then whether there might be some need for revision in your own opinion, rather than that of His Holiness Pope Shenouda.
Here are some excerpts from the dialogue with the Roman Catholics, showing that our fathers do not view them as members of another religion, even if they are in error on many things. These are all meetings conducted by senior bishops of our Holy Synod. You may disagree with these activities, but you must admit that you are not disagreeing with just me, but with the bishops of the Coptic Orthodox Church.
We met together to discuss and to investigate, in mutual respect and with the spirit of love for one another, what we can do to hasten or to push forward the case of the union between our two Apostolic sister Churches.
Our Lord Jesus Christ willed that His Church be one, we are confident that a way will be found to achieve union between our two sister Churches.
In spite of the fact of the desire and hope for the Unity for which we have been praying for centuries, we recognize the existence of points of divergences which have grown wide since the Schism which took place in Chalcedon in 451 A.D.
Father Peter
But Ioannes you have repeated you assertion that probably all Protestants accept the teaching of a 'rapture' even though others here have suggested that you are incorrect.
Certainly to the best of my knowledge no Lutherans (the original Protestants) accept such a teaching. Here is a passage from an official website.
Q. Does The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod believe in the rapture?
A. The answer to your question depends on what you mean by "the rapture." The English word "rapture" is derived from the Latin translation of the verb "caught up" in 1 Thess. 4:17 (rapiemur). Lutherans certainly believe what Paul teaches in this passage, namely, that those who are still living on earth when Christ returns visibly on the last day "will be caught up" ("raptured") together with "the dead in Christ" to "meet the Lord in the air."
Some Christians teach, however, that the "rapture" will take place not on the last day but in connection with an "invisible" coming of Christ occurring before a seven-year period of "tribulation" on earth, allowing Christians to "escape" this tribulation and then later return to earth for a literal "1000 year reign of Christ."
Lutherans do not believe that these teachings are based on a proper understanding of Scripture. Scripture teaches that all Christians will endure varying degrees of "tribulation" until the last day, that Christ will return only once (visibly) to "catch up" ("rapture") all believers, living and dead, into heaven, and that all believers will reign forever with him in heaven. Lutherans understand the "1000 years" of Rev. 20:11-15 to be a figurative reference to Christ's reign here and now in the hearts and lives of believers, which will culminate in our reigning with Christ forever in heaven following his return on the last day.
There are 75 million Lutherans around the world. It is also the case that Anglicans do not accept this teaching, and there are about 75 million Anglicans. It is also the case that most Methodists do not accept this teaching, nor Presbyterians, nor most Congregationalists, and some Baptist groups. So in actual fact rather a large proportion of Protestants do not accept this teaching at all. Those that do are mostly to be found among evangelical, bible-church, pentecostal and non-denominational groups - all of which tend ot be united in not having a denominational structure but being directed to a great extent by the personality and opinions of their pastor.
Father Peter
Do I think I misunderstood the Holy Spirit? It is possible. This is why I look to the early church fathers for help. I feel I have provided sufficient evidence that would suggest that ecumenism, in part the WCC, is probably not the best way to go. What other reason is there for the WCC? Is the goal, despite their own admission on the website to the contrary, to just have dialog and understand one another? I find it hard to believe that an organization would go through this much trouble so that we could all hang out and talk to each other. I am worried very much about this issue but more worried with the growing number of clergy accepting protestantism as Christian and actually allowing their congregation to mingle in protestant churches. That is shocking to me.
Are you a deacon or a subdeacon/reader/acolyte?
I think that we need to distinguish between numbers of groups and their populations. I have shown that hundreds of millions or Protestants do not accept the 'rapture'. You are considering that 3 small congregations under a dominant pastor are the same sort of denomination as the Lutherans. This does not make sense. It is not reasonable to say that 3 of these groups which might include only a few hundred people outweigh 1 Lutheran denomination which might be made up of tens of millions of members. These are not equal comparisons. You have repeatedly said that most protestants teach this doctrine, but I have shown that at least 200 million don't.
The reason I disagree with you on this point is not odd. It is because you are not being fair to the facts. A very large group of Protestants - 200 million+ - do not accept it. You keep saying this is wrong, but the words of these groups themselves shows that my figures are true.
I would appreciate it if you answered my question. I will repeat it.
Should His Holiness Pope Shenouda be excommunicated and deposed, together with most of our Holy Synod because they have prayed with people who are not members of our Orthodox Church as you have stated the canons require?
Father Peter