For Andrew Gabriel Roth

[Christina]

...Please do not, however, make false statements concerning what Eastern Christians believe. The vast majority of them, from the beginning of the faith, have held to Trinitarian doctrine. It is not a Latin innovation. It is you who has made this unsubstantiated claim...

Do you understand yet that this is not your Western view? This is not equivalent to trinity,

Please stop referring to it as a Western view. It appears that you are misunderstanding this:

The Indian Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Coptic Orthodox Church, etc. are most definitely Apostolic assemblies, tracing themselves to the original Christian communities, and all hold to Trinitarian doctrine. They are not Roman and are most definitely not Protestant.

Again, I hold to the understanding shared by most Eastern Christians from the beginning of the faith. The Assyrian Church of the East, regardless of what it teaches, represents a small minority of Eastern Christians. You have a right to your position, but please don't misrepresent church history...

Spyridon, boy do you have much to learn! The problem is you ARE looking at Church history from a WESTERN perspective, let me explain:

The ???Eastern Othodox Church??? is a misomeaner, this church is NOT an eastern church, and I'll tell you why:

???Eastern??? in this sense means the eastern portion of the Roman empire, which is why it's also called the Church of Constantinople or the Byzantine Rite. But it's STILL the Roman empire which means it's really a WESTERN church. Same goes for the Copts & Ethiopians ??? they are churches of the Roman empire ??? they are WESTERN churches, NOT eastern churches. The true Eastern Church is that which was OUTSIDE the Roman empire, the church of the Persian empire ??? the Church of the East!

As for your church ??? the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, I believe that akhan Paul told you what happened there:

Shlama Spyridon,

Your ancestors were once members of the CoE, but when the Portuguese conquered India and forced Roman Catholicism on the native CoE there, many refused and instead looked to Antioch (the SOC) for help and established ties with the Antiochian branch of the Church. The reason is that after Tamerlane devastated the CoE, it went into seclusion in the mountains of Hakkari in Turkey and we could not make contact.

The SOC and CoE are really unrelated. We have some common Patristic writers (like Ephrem), but that was before the split in 431 AD.

+Shamasha

Shlama Akhi Spyridon,

http://www.indianchristianity.org/assyrian.html

...Before 1665, from Apostolic times, the believers in India were of the Church of the East. They were under the leadership of the Catholicos of Babylon. Tamerlane, who slaughtered the Church of the East mercilessly, interrupted our communication, but you were safe in India. You accepted the authority of Antioch in 1665 because it was close to your native Christian heritage (Aramaic/Semitic), and you didn't want Roman rule brought by the Portuguese...

Unfortunately the Portuguese were successful in forcing the vast majority of Indian believers into Roman Catholicism, and the SOC was another church who came in as an alternative, while the CoE was weak and in exile in the mountains of Hakkari in Turkey. The latter is the Church you now refer to as the "Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church."...

Notice that akhan Paul said that the Persian Church (COE) only split into COE & SOC in AD 431 ??? prior to this date NO eastern church held the trinity doctrine! Your statement:

The Indian Orthodox Church, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, the Syriac Orthodox Church, the Coptic Orthodox Church, etc. are most definitely Apostolic assemblies, tracing themselves to the original Christian communities,

Is incorrect because:

a) the Ethiopians, Copts, Greek Orthodox are NOT eastern churches, they can call themselves ???eastern??? all they want ??? the truth is they have NO right to do so.
b) the Indian Orthodox, Syriac Orthodox are NOT Apostolic churches ??? they broke off from the COE, same with the Maronites & Chaldeans who also broke off from the COE and joined with Rome much, much later.

Akhan Paul is much more versed in this and can go into much more detail, but the point is the Eastern Church ??? the true Eastern Church has NEVER held the unScriptural ???3 persons in 1 God??? doctrine ??? that is fact!