Recent Posts

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
91
Other Topics / Re: Post a picture of your OWN OC.net persona
« Last post by TheTrisagion on Today at 12:13:51 AM »
I regret I can't participate in this thread because the photo I'd post would violate the forum rules.

I'm guessing you'd be safe. We'd probably have to greatly magnify the image in order to see the violation.  ;)

Selam
BOOM!!!

Gebre throwin' shade HARD
92
Religious Topics / Re: Creationism, Evolution, and Orthodoxy
« Last post by minasoliman on Today at 12:12:47 AM »
I just read this article. I'm not sure I agree with it entirely, but I found it very interesting nonetheless:

http://orthodox-theology.com/media/PDF/1.2017/Alexander.Khramov.pdf

My main objections/criticisms are the following:

1) Even though the author denies the similarities of the argument to gnosticism, I think it still reeks of gnosticism.
2) It doesn't answer the question of when exactly the fallen Adam and Eve entered fallen history, and how do they relate to the genealogies of the OT.
3) I don't think what he calls "theistic evolutionism" necessarily has to put the blame of evolution, the futility of creation and the suffering of animals on God. One of my favorite theories regarding this, based on the scholastic tradition of Thomas Aquinas regarding angels (who at the same time took it from some Church Fathers such as Pseudo-Dionysius and I believe John Scotus Eriugena), is that due to the great power they were given at the beginning over the physical creation, it's not entirely unreasonable to believe that evolution was a result of the fall of angels from Heaven, who from the very beginning tried to distort and corrupt God's creation (leading up to evolution). It still has some problems, such as how to interpret the entrance of sin into the world "through one man" and the cosmic effects of original sin. But I think it's the only theistic-evolutionist position that doesn't make God look like an evil or incompetent Demiurge.

Just finished reading this...really difficult to muscle this into my brain, and I feel like I have to reread this a couple of times...buuuuttt...

I honestly don't see a point anymore in trying to harmonize evolution with theology.  Theology teaches God is Creator of all things seen and unseen.  Humanity lives in sin if it doesn't seek unity and life-giving relationship with the Father through Christ.  Evolution seeks to explain the the diversity of biological organisms through a consistency of scientific laws.  I tend to see that the assumption of consistency and nature following laws as proof of the intelligible nature of creation that points to the intelligent Logos, but that's it.  It doesn't seek to explain divine purpose.

At the same time, rather than separating the two into "pre-Fall paradisaical" and "post-Fall laws of science", why can't the laws of science be the icon of the Logos?  I find that the weakness in the article continues to create a split dichotomy, where one side has nothing to do with the other.  No!  One depends on the other.  The laws of science, including evolution, still result from the fully active divine in every aspect of our creation.  He doesn't just snap His fingers and doesn't get involved.  I also accept the laws of embryology.  That doesn't mean God didn't create me but a mere sperm/egg fusion.

Sooooo, as someone as accepts evolution at face value, I don't see why there should be a "problem".  It's not like theology depended on the falsity or truth of evolution.  Theology depends on how the world can be related to our understanding of our place and purpose in Christ.  Regardless of what mechanism the formation of the cosmos can be explained, that formation alone only becomes an academic curiosity and technological advancement, but doesn't go far enough to explain TRUE life in Christ.

Neither should we be throwing stones at scientists because of how they "stick" with evolution.  As someone who works in science, I fully sympathize with that position, and I feel most people who are anti-evolution don't really take the time to fully understand the science, but seek ONLY to disprove by ANY MEANS NECESSARY.  Such a life is not real life, but a life filled with fear, a fear non-existent.  With Christ, there's nothing to be afraid of.  Just let the chips fall where they may.  Evolution never changed Orthodox theology.  It's presuppositions that change.
94
Orthodox-Protestant Discussion / Re: Jesus is the Bible?
« Last post by Agabus on Today at 12:10:41 AM »
I've noticed lots of Orthodox, in other contexts, like to pretend "the canon" was a simple and clear pronouncement in council extremely early in the Church, and I think this is counter-productive. There's no reason I can think of to go following after the Reformers and Counter-Reformers in this way, and certainly not to be borrowing the very latest "facts" from Protestant blogs and publications.

It's easier than admitting the truth, which is that the EO hasn't yet defined canon in the same way that Trent did.

95
Other Topics / Re: What does everyone look like?
« Last post by Porter ODoran on Today at 12:08:46 AM »
Fantastic! And mandolin is great. Do you play bluegrass?
96
You r maybe even more accurately it reflects the second century conflict between Petrine that is Judaic Christianity and the Gentile or Pauline/Marcionite Christianity.
Matthew 16:18
Peter's Confession of Christ
…17Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”…
A couple of months ago a lightbulb came up above my head when I noticed the future tense in that sentence.  When does Our Lord give Peter the keys?  In Galilee, to him and to the other Apostles at the same time.  Peter was not the only Apostle to receive the keys nor did he in advance, hardly a justification for modern papal claims.

Thank you so much for pointing this out. Some even Orthodox posters have wanted to position this as a contradiction or supercedence to the passages which recount the Lord giving the keys to the Apostles as he returned to his Father. Plainly St. Peter received a promise of that event here, nothing more.
it's most likely a second century interpolation when Rome was already trying to create its own mythology and pedigree and project it back into that mythical apostolic golden age.
One would think you'd be too busy with your own mythology of misnamed "historical materialism" (which has no material existence in history) and its fabricated dialectic, to have time to make up such baseless nonsense, easily disproved (e.g. why would Rome interpolate its pedigree in the Antiochian Gospel and not the one associated with Old Rome, i.e. St. Mark?)
97
Other Topics / Re: Post a picture of your OWN OC.net persona
« Last post by Mor Ephrem on Yesterday at 11:59:48 PM »
I regret I can't participate in this thread because the photo I'd post would violate the forum rules.

I'm guessing you'd be safe. We'd probably have to greatly magnify the image in order to see the violation.  ;)

Selam

That's not what I was going to post, but well done!
98
Other Topics / Re: What does everyone look like?
« Last post by Agabus on Yesterday at 11:54:44 PM »
Perhaps not as foppish as AN would prefer, but still playing a southern instrument.
99
Religious Topics / Re: Off-topic Lutheran Propaganda Nonsense Goes Here
« Last post by Father H on Yesterday at 11:54:07 PM »
very interesting. I vaguely remember reading in a Delumeau book if I'm not mistaken about German scholars proving from the Bible that german was spoken in paradise but the serpent addressed Eve in French.

Well there's your problem.
I don't think I get it.  He's a Catholic iirc.

Do you have any idea how many Catholics there are? Better to look at his work than at his baptism.
ha! But he put forward a good theory as to how Xtianity was transmitted in Europe up to maybe early 20th century I don't remember the exact terminus point. He makes a good argument that it was almost always from grandparents to grandchildren and how the emergence of the nuclear family messed up the mechanism. So this led to the secularization of today .

Augustin, you will eventually be a fully theist Christian.  God is working on you, even if you don't believe in Him, much like gravity is working on you even if you don't believe its author.  Keep your pews (we keep ours). 
100
Christian News / Re: EP rejects candidates for Chicago Metropolis
« Last post by Basil 320 on Yesterday at 11:51:40 PM »
::)

What now?

Basil 320's song and dance was more than a little ridiculous.

I'm sure these fathers, beloved brethren, will continue to work thru the matter for the spiritual benefit of all. Treating of brethren as tho they are enemies better suits the demons' ditty of discord than a sacred chant.

I hope you're right, never-the-less.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10