Originally posted by Ben Gash
I am an individual and my relationship with God is just that, MY relationship. I have to accept that I am not going to agree with every other Christian on all issues. But then why should I, if none are perfect?
Right, absolutely. In fact, I think we agree that this itself is one of the major “innovations” of the Christian faith.
To me, though, this doesn’t mean in the least that we should de-emphasize out “theological differences” or that such discussion is a “a spiritual dead end” nor “knitpicking over the letter of the law.”
Rather, to truly recognize our differences is the only way to have a real meaning to the fact that we do have a personal relationship with God, and that we (“we” in the general sense, not specifically you and I) do both struggle to understand our relationship with Man and the divine.
To argue from a respect for unique personal relationship to a de-valuing of theological differences is I believe, analogous to the approach to combatting racism which asserts that there are no differences between the races. This kind of ****geny, it seems to me, defeats the very reality of the thing it is trying to protect: the richness of our unique experience.
When I say that Catholicism differs from Protestantism, and even when I make a meal out of such a statement, I don’t do it to distance the two movements; rather, I do it in utmost respect of the unique “spiritual warfare” and “constant conversion” that is at place in the minds of any believer.
If I adhere specifically and with rigor to stereotypically Catholic thought, it is only a reflection of my own personal journey. If I may vehemently defend a belief in say, purgatory, it is but a reflection of my own “spiritual warfare”; that I may disagree with you is not, perhaps contrary to appearances, in disrespect of your view, but quite the opposite: in utmost respect and understanding that we do have differences. Of course, I mean this in the general and universal sense, rather than regarding specifically you and I.
When I say the following, I do not mean it in the least to be a devaluation of Protestantism: Frankly, I find Buddhists, Moslems, and any other group as much “brethren in faith” as I do Protestants, insofar as they are participating honestly in “spiritual warfare.” If I feel a particular attachment as a Catholic towards Protestants, under the rubric of shared Christianity, I liken it to the same sort of particular attachment I might feel towards the Irish and Scottish people of my ancestry: while there is a distinct connection there, an Irishman or a Scotsman is worth no more as a human being than a Nigerian or an Ainu.
So as strongly as I might adhere and argue, even preach, towards Catholic values, it is meant as a vindicaton of, not a refutation of, the true meaningfullness that I (and therefore, I presume, anyone else) has put towards their own spiritual relationships.
What a mouthfull! But we are trying to sneak in evangelism here, aren’t we? 
I mean off the top of my head we disagree on: Charismata… The necessity of Sacrement of the Sick
I assume you disagree with cessationism, as does Orthodox/Catholicism. Similarly, Catholics/Orthodox accept Sacrament to the Sick.
The divinity (and virginity) of Mary
Just for sake of discussion: the virginity of Mary is “symbolic” of Jesus’ birth without the yolk of original sin, and hence without the yoke of the Mosaic law (both of which being representative of a function by which man is separated from God), and hence able to found the grace by which mankind attains the same condition.
As for the divinity of Mary, I know this is a regular Protestant complaint against Orthodox/Catholicism. Catholics don’t believe Mary, nor the Saints, are divine as God is though. In the Catholic conception, prayers are offered with Mary (and/or the Saints) in the same way that prayers are offered up during church service with the congregation of the faithfull; specifically, it’s representative of the idea that, what it is to be “the congregation of the faithfull” is not that a group of physical bodies are gathered in a physical building, but rather, this phrase has a meaning which includes heaven itself. The “specialness” of saints/Mary in this regard is that Catholics believe they “know” that they are in heaven (as opposed to other “dead” people).
purgatory
In the Catholic/Orthodox conception, God is characterized as “The Good” and “The One” (as elaborated on by the Platonists), rather than as “The Judge” (as elaborated on by the Jews, and arguably, the Protestants). From this point of view, it seems to me that Catholic/Orthodox must accept the doctrine of purgatory, as rejecting it is rejecting the primacy of God as the Good and the One.
As “The Good”, God would never **** someone to eternal suffering (or, indeed, eternal seperation from Him). As “The One”, there is no power in existance which can usurp this privelege from him (specifically, neither the devil nor man, nor the act of physical death).
The only complication here is of God’s greatest gift to man - free will. Following this, one can argue that the only circumstance in which someone would be eternally seperated from God is if they truly did not want to unite with him (salvation).
This relates to the Catholic conception of mortal sin vs. venal sin; the former being one which results in ****ation (eternal seperation from God). Following the above then, the only mortal sin is not even wanting to be saved. All other sin is venal.
Who among us is free from venal sins? I assume you’d accept that no one is.
What, then, occurs at death? Are the sinfull united with God? Or is everyone ****ed to Hell save Jesus himself? Neither of these options seems tenable.
Then, if the something happens which cleanses the sinfull such that they become united with God, who among the sinfull become so cleansed?
Following the previous discussion and recalling the God is primarily “The Good” and thus eternally gracious, one must conclude that all but mortal sinners are so cleansed; specifically, all but those who do not wish to be.
In other words, quite simply, the only thing that holds back God’s love is truly not wanting it in the first place; in other words, the noly thing that holds back God’s love is his own greatest gift: free will.
What are the alternatives? That man can hold back God’s love? Do you believe man to be so powerfull? That the devil can? Do you believe the devil to be so powerfull? That the physical act of death arrests God’s power? Do you think God to be so weak? That God’s love is limited, or that God’s power is limited? Again, no good.
And thus, purgatory is born.
The contents of the ten commandments
I don’t think they’re a Christian conception to begin with, as previously discussed. 
The use of elctric guitar in worship
Hahaha, yeah that’s gotta go. 
I’m a fan of Byzantine chant myself. Powerfull stuff.
As for the salvation issue, this is something that I have been thinking about a lot recently… So which is it? So then I have to go off and ponder the nature of belief. Does it mean to acknowledge existence, or does it mean something more. In believing do I have to change certain fundamental principles of my thinking? Does this have more to do with faith?
Yeah, I can relate to these struggles. I have a gut feeling that some answer may lie in an understanding of “salvation” as relating to the present rather than the unknown future. Can’t say I can elaborate much at this point though.
Take care. 
