The Eastern Orthodox Church is the Church founded by Jesus Christ in 33 AD

Pro said: “Very few of the points in the previous posthave anything to do with refuting the claim made in the title of the debate, soI will only address those, because we only have two rounds left and still havebarely even discussed the subject matter at hand.” Rebuttal: The title of the debate seeks to establish that the EOC was the one, true, holy, apostolicchurch founded in year 33. I have conclusively shown, through the scripture,that the EOC does not meet the qualifications of being the one, true, holy, apostolicChurch. The scripture is at home in a debate such as this. If you do not acceptthis premise in the context of scripture, then your resolution condemns itself. Pro assumed: “It seems your main argument is that there isno such thing as a visible church.” Rebuttal: Straw man. The term “visible Church” is not scriptural. It was first used in the 4thcentury AD [1], and referred to the doctrinal institution which was composed ofboth true believers and false claimers of faith. The true Church is composed of his sheep only, not a blending of sheep and wolves. He never charged Peter with tending to the “visible church.” Consider John 21: 15 –“Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more thanthese?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him,“Feed my lambs.” 16 He said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” 17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son ofJohn, do you love me?” Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time,“Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know thatI love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep.” “ The Psalmist exclaim:” Your rod and your staff, they comfort me.” This is in reference to a Shepard.The staff was designed to hook around the neck of the sheep, to keep them fromgoing astray. The rod was a weapon, designed to trash the wolves that attackedthe flock. We can clearly see that the Church of Christ is composed of Sheeponly and that God keeps the true sheep from straying too far, as well asprotecting them from the wolves. The true Church does not have wolves in itsmidst, the “visible Church” does. The “Visible Church” is a man-made tradition and yet another example of EOC heresy attempting to establish doctrine where the scripture issilent. Pro argued:” by your definition, no church could evenhave existed prior to the Synod of Hippo, nearly 400 years later. Are yousaying no one was saved before the Bible was canonized? And by the way, whocanonized the Bible? The Church that isn't real?” Rebuttal: The Church was established from the mouth of Christ. In Matthew 16:18, Jesus said:”I will build my Church.” Notice, whom it is that builds the Church, and whomthe Church belongs to. The Church was not built by the Apostles. It was builtby Christ and it belongs to Christ. Knowing this, what are we supposed to dowith your claim that the EOC is the one true, holy, apostolic Church? I’ve already established what the Church is,and what it is not. Clearly, the EOC is not a church, but rather a doctrinalinstitution. Pro said:” if the Church is solely invisible, then what do you make of the following verse? (1Timothy 3:14-15)” Rebuttal: A verse aimed at the sheep, not the wolves. Why would he ask the wolves to conductthemselves Holy? Pro established: "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like adragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind, which, whenit was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good intovessels, but threw the bad away." - Matt 13:47-52 Rebuttal: “…..but threw the bad away”. Obviously, the “bad” did not get included in the bodyof Christ. I’m not sure what this should establish, except that the body ofChrist is composed of “good vessels” only. The Church is a “Holy Nation”. Are the Non-believers Holy? The Church is theRoyal Priesthood. Are the condemned among them? The Church is the chosenpeople. Are those whom are cast into darkness chosen for light? The Church isthe elect. Are the lost within them? Pro established: The Church could not possibly have 'onlycaught the good fish', or 'only gathered the wheat' without accumulating thetares. As I stated in my initial post, the Church is not a salvation club. Rebuttal: Logical error. The Church does not catch good fish. The “net” in this parable is theGospel, not the Church. Consider the parable of the sower. The word takes root,not the Church. Gospel =/= Church Pro argued:” You say the Eastern Orthodox Church was 'doctrinally established' in 1054 AD. Can you tell me what 'new doctrine' was introduced in 1054, by which the Church 'established' itself? I know of none. “ Rebuttal: The same way that the South became its own national entity after withdrawing fromthe United States, so did the EOC become its own doctrinal entity after theschism in 1054. It makes no sense to appeal to an EOC historical perspective onthis matter, because the Catholic perspective is the polar extreme and negatesit. Pro argues:” … there is a massive disconnect here, asit is precisely your definition which assumes two bodies - one invisible andone visible, with no correlation whatsoever between the two, hence, distinct.While I have already supplied this quote, which denies there are two bodies:…” Rebuttal: Straw man. I did not describe a difference betweenthe visible and invisible. I described the absolute separation between the TrueChurch of Christ and a doctrinal entity. If I recognize the EOC as the body ofChrist, I might as well recognize Microsoft Corp. as the body of Christ. Wouldn’tyou agree that the Company employs professing Christians? Clearly, we see: Institution =/= Church. Pro stated: “ Con has stated the Orthodox Church wasfounded in 1054, which I have shown to be simply a historical bias viewedthrough a western lens.” Rebuttal: I have shown that the EOC does not qualify to be called the one, true, holy, apostolicChurch. It could have founded on the second day of creation and still notconstitute the true Church. Even so, you have yet to prove your burden ineither regard. My premises have been met with little more than an appeal totradition. Pro has flagrantly negated the burden and openly refused toaddress my objections. Pro said: “Con has also tried to argue that the onlyreal Church is an invisible one, thus differentiating and making distinct twoseparate Churches. This does not hold up to either Scripture, or logic whenapplied to a different time period.” Rebuttal: I have not argued that the Church is invisible. I have argued that the Church is not adoctrinal institution governed by EOC tradition and Dogma. I argued that theChurch was created by Christ, and entirely accepts every soul purchased bysaving faith, regardless of which doctrine their institution preaches. Sources http://www.reformationtheology.com... [1]