OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 30, 2014, 09:56:52 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Can and should I be baptized again?  (Read 9961 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« on: August 22, 2010, 06:45:31 AM »

This question has been bothering me for a while.  Sad

As a former Muslim, I was baptized in the Orthodox Church in 1997, but there was no immersion (Only through pouring water). More, the language of the parish was Arabic, and the priest baptized me in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, he used the word Allah throughout the ritual of baptism, which makes me doubt the validity of my baptism now since I believe Allah to be the name of a false god and an idol worshipped by Meccan pagans prior to Islam/Mohammad. Some Christians say Allah does not exist and is a false deity (the moon god of the Meccans). Would it therefore be possible to repeat my baptism in Greek or include the names Elohim YHWH into the ritual even if I can be baptized a second time in the Arabic Church through immersion? (I mean can the priest replace the word Allah with Elohim or YHWH while giving me the sacrament?)

Thanks for the answers.

Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2010, 08:36:45 AM »

God speaks all languages. When I was baptized, the priest used the same terms "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" that were used in my former Protestant church, but he meant something very different than the Protestants meant. Same with your case. Allah is the generic name for God in Arabic. If it bothers you so much, you should talk with your priest about it. But don't worry; if your baptism was done canonically, it is valid. You cannot and should not be baptized again.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,506



« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2010, 03:37:59 PM »

I do not speak Arabic - other than maybe a half dozen phrases learned in my English language Antiochian parish. This is as much a question as a comment. Christianity precedes Islam by several centuries. What did the Arabic Christians of those centuries call God? I would suggest that it was the Muslims who appropriated the word "Allah" for their own uses. Not unusual - Mormons and JWs use Christian terminology with heretical meanings.

Here's an earlier discussion about the word "Allah" http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13547.0.html
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2010, 04:11:00 PM »

"Allah" is just the generic word for God in Arabic- if you want to claim that it can only be the name of a false God, then all the Arabic speaking Christians have been worshipping a false God.

Just about all of the words we have for "God," including "God" itself, not to mention the Greek θεός, come from pagan religions.

Regarding the pouring, well, it's done frequently in many places, sometimes out of necessity, sometimes not. But while it may not have been ideal, there was nothing to make your baptism invalid. You are a baptized Orthodox Christian.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2010, 05:10:34 PM »

Pozdrav Brate....
If theres a Russian orthodox Church
there, have them do the full immersion
 of holy baptism, if the Greeks won't do it.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #5 on: August 22, 2010, 05:20:36 PM »

No and no. There is no baptism after chrismation.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2010, 05:20:51 PM by mike » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,589



« Reply #6 on: August 22, 2010, 05:48:29 PM »

This question has been bothering me for a while.  Sad

As a former Muslim, I was baptized in the Orthodox Church in 1997, but there was no immersion (Only through pouring water). More, the language of the parish was Arabic, and the priest baptized me in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, he used the word Allah throughout the ritual of baptism, which makes me doubt the validity of my baptism now since I believe Allah to be the name of a false god and an idol worshipped by Meccan pagans prior to Islam/Mohammad. Some Christians say Allah does not exist and is a false deity (the moon god of the Meccans). Would it therefore be possible to repeat my baptism in Greek or include the names Elohim YHWH into the ritual even if I can be baptized a second time in the Arabic Church through immersion? (I mean can the priest replace the word Allah with Elohim or YHWH while giving me the sacrament?)

Thanks for the answers.



Given that you were actually Baptized in the Orthodox Church, I would be inclined to advise against it.  This is different than if you were just Chrismated.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,186



« Reply #7 on: August 22, 2010, 07:21:50 PM »

Allah simply means "God."  Muslims have no more right to that word than my worst enemy to the air we both breathe.  You were baptized in the name of the Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  I was, too, though it was in a Lutheran church back in the 1970s and in  a very liberal one, mind you, where, now, any baptismal formula, as long as it's three-fold, is accepted.  I was not immersed, but sprinkled.  My baptism was perfected or made complete with the Mystery of Confession and then the reception of the Holy Mystery of the Eucharist.  If your baptism was done in any other way save for the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then you should be rebaptized.  But as from what you described, you don't need to be.  Getting too legalistic about it will not be a good step for your entering into the Church.  FWIW.
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 22, 2010, 08:00:14 PM »

And yet those who "apostatize" are often Chrismated again, and as such it could be deduced that the OP is not considered to be currently Chrismated. If this is the case, then why would it be unreasonable to also be Baptized as his/her return?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,589



« Reply #9 on: August 22, 2010, 10:12:15 PM »

And yet those who "apostatize" are often Chrismated again, and as such it could be deduced that the OP is not considered to be currently Chrismated. If this is the case, then why would it be unreasonable to also be Baptized as his/her return?

How do you get that?  I know of no Orthodox Church that does not Chrismate immediately after Baptism.  Am I wrong about this?
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #10 on: August 22, 2010, 11:47:30 PM »

And yet those who "apostatize" are often Chrismated again, and as such it could be deduced that the OP is not considered to be currently Chrismated. If this is the case, then why would it be unreasonable to also be Baptized as his/her return?

How do you get that?  I know of no Orthodox Church that does not Chrismate immediately after Baptism.  Am I wrong about this?
I think he's referring to the practice of reception of those who were once baptized and chrismated and who had since apostatized and returned to the Church.  According to what I've seen, such will be received back into the Church via confession and the application of Holy Chrism to the forehead alone.

In answer to DVE's question, however, if a person has received a proper Orthodox baptism, that baptism is effective to cover the person's entire life and need not nor cannot be repeated upon return to the Church after a time of apostasy.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 23, 2010, 12:41:41 AM »

And yet those who "apostatize" are often Chrismated again, and as such it could be deduced that the OP is not considered to be currently Chrismated. If this is the case, then why would it be unreasonable to also be Baptized as his/her return?

How do you get that?  I know of no Orthodox Church that does not Chrismate immediately after Baptism.  Am I wrong about this?

I didn't suggest that they didn't. What I pointed out was that when a Baptized and Chrismated Orthodox Christian leaves the faith, they are often received back by Chrismation. That much is a fact.

What I think is a logical implication of that is that they lost the effect of Chrismation.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #12 on: August 23, 2010, 02:09:49 AM »

As a former Muslim, I was baptized in the Orthodox Church in 1997, but there was no immersion (Only through pouring water). More, the language of the parish was Arabic, and the priest baptized me in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, he used the word Allah throughout the ritual of baptism, which makes me doubt the validity of my baptism now since I believe Allah to be the name of a false god and an idol worshipped by Meccan pagans prior to Islam/Mohammad. Some Christians say Allah does not exist and is a false deity (the moon god of the Meccans). Would it therefore be possible to repeat my baptism in Greek or include the names Elohim YHWH into the ritual even if I can be baptized a second time in the Arabic Church through immersion? (I mean can the priest replace the word Allah with Elohim or YHWH while giving me the sacrament?)

No! Do not grieve the heart of God (Allah). Even though pouring is not ideal, this is fine and is an ancient practice. You must not forsake your Orthodox baptism over your linguistic hangups. The Protestants who say such things are ignorant and you must not follow their error in this area.

Take heart and have faith, my dear brother!
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 02:10:35 AM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Gamliel
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 2,227



« Reply #13 on: August 23, 2010, 02:18:30 AM »

Might want to ask your priest or write your bishop.
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,569



WWW
« Reply #14 on: August 23, 2010, 02:27:34 AM »

This question has been bothering me for a while.  Sad

As a former Muslim, I was baptized in the Orthodox Church in 1997, but there was no immersion (Only through pouring water). More, the language of the parish was Arabic, and the priest baptized me in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, he used the word Allah throughout the ritual of baptism, which makes me doubt the validity of my baptism now since I believe Allah to be the name of a false god and an idol worshipped by Meccan pagans prior to Islam/Mohammad. Some Christians say Allah does not exist and is a false deity (the moon god of the Meccans). Would it therefore be possible to repeat my baptism in Greek or include the names Elohim YHWH into the ritual even if I can be baptized a second time in the Arabic Church through immersion? (I mean can the priest replace the word Allah with Elohim or YHWH while giving me the sacrament?)

Thanks for the answers.

Theophilos,

First, I think Greeks dont use immersion, but rather pouring.

Second, I was baptized Lutheran without immersion and received through Chrismation as per the long-held Russian tradition, and which was also the original practice for receiving noncanonical Christians.

Third, the words father son and holy spirit dont have the word Allah,

fourth, in Russian, the word for God is Bog, and this could have a pagan origin (like "Allah"), but it's still the word in services. "Services" BTW are "Bogosluzheniya"

Fifth, the word Allah might have the same root as El (God). Elohim is a plural, anyway, I think.

You should be good.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #15 on: August 23, 2010, 02:40:41 AM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 02:43:15 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #16 on: August 23, 2010, 02:48:47 AM »

Don't worry Theophilos78, I'm also not  'truly baptised'  Roll Eyes
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #17 on: August 23, 2010, 02:53:47 AM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

No, no. I think this way is allowed for in the Didache, but correct me if I'm wrong.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #18 on: August 23, 2010, 03:35:28 AM »

"Allah" is just the generic word for God in Arabic- if you want to claim that it can only be the name of a false God, then all the Arabic speaking Christians have been worshipping a false God.


I have an Orthodox friend who says it is high time the Church convened a council to forbid the use of the word Allah in Christian liturgy and Bible.

Allah does not actually mean God in Arabic, but is used as the name of the supreme deity. The Arabic word that corresponds to the English word God is ILAH rather than Allah. This is why we say "true GOD from true GOD" while reciting the Nicene Creed in English, and this line is translated as "ILAH haq min ILAH haq" into Arabic rather than "Allah haq min Allah haq".  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #19 on: August 23, 2010, 03:36:50 AM »

Pozdrav Brate....
If theres a Russian orthodox Church
there, have them do the full immersion
 of holy baptism, if the Greeks won't do it.... Grin

Pozdrav brate.

I wish I could do that.  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #20 on: August 23, 2010, 03:45:02 AM »

Might want to ask your priest or write your bishop.

I cannot do that because the priest who baptized me reposed in the Lord last year. (Memory eternal).

Now I am no more in the city where I received the holy mysteries. In my new place there is a small Greek Church that opens occasionally (once in a while). The priest that mostly comes to celebrate the divine liturgy does not speak English. I cannot speak Greek. This is why it is almost impossible for us to communicate and talk about this serious issue. More, even if the Greek priest said that I needed to be baptized again, the second baptism would not be easy as the Greek Church here will never baptize converts from Islam in my country. (We must leave the country and receive baptism in another place due to the problems between the EP and the government).  Sad
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #21 on: August 23, 2010, 03:52:49 AM »


Theophilos,

First, I think Greeks dont use immersion, but rather pouring.

I know a few converts of Islamic origin who were baptized in Athens a few weeks ago. I think they were fully immersed in water, but I shall ask them to be sure. Thanks for reminding me.

Third, the words father son and holy spirit dont have the word Allah

Yes, but the Biblical readings and the Nicene Creed had the word Allah. I did not utter that word throughout the ritual though. Even the Nicene Creed was recited in Arabic by a deacon on my behalf as I could not and cannot speak Arabic.

fourth, in Russian, the word for God is Bog, and this could have a pagan origin (like "Allah"), but it's still the word in services. "Services" BTW are "Bogosluzheniya"


Then we should have only the word Elohim or YHWH in our liturgies. Don't you agree?

Fifth, the word Allah might have the same root as El (God). Elohim is a plural, anyway, I think.


Yet Allah is used as the personal name of the only and supreme deity in Islam.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #22 on: August 23, 2010, 03:56:16 AM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

No, no. I think this way is allowed for in the Didache, but correct me if I'm wrong.

And concerning baptism,  baptize this way:  Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water.  But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice  upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before. (Didache chapter 7 from newadvent encyclopedia).

Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #23 on: August 23, 2010, 07:38:23 AM »

I have an Orthodox friend who says it is high time the Church convened a council to forbid the use of the word Allah in Christian liturgy and Bible.

Well... that's really dumb. Should we ban the use of the word "God" because, once upon a time, it was used to describe Wotan and Thor? Should we ban "Theos" because it used to refer to Zeus?

Quote
Allah does not actually mean God in Arabic, but is used as the name of the supreme deity. The Arabic word that corresponds to the English word God is ILAH rather than Allah. This is why we say "true GOD from true GOD" while reciting the Nicene Creed in English, and this line is translated as "ILAH haq min ILAH haq" into Arabic rather than "Allah haq min Allah haq".  Wink

"Allah"= contraction of "Al" and "Ilah" = "the God". It is the Arabic name for the one true God.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2010, 07:51:13 AM »

Well... that's really dumb. Should we ban the use of the word "God" because, once upon a time, it was used to describe Wotan and Thor? Should we ban "Theos" because it used to refer to Zeus?

Or even Elohim, which was used for other Mesopotamean deities, not just the God of the Jews.
Logged
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,506



« Reply #25 on: August 23, 2010, 08:46:22 AM »

Well... that's really dumb. Should we ban the use of the word "God" because, once upon a time, it was used to describe Wotan and Thor? Should we ban "Theos" because it used to refer to Zeus?

Or even Elohim, which was used for other Mesopotamean deities, not just the God of the Jews.
I agree entirely. If we ban all words with pre-Christian or non-Christian origins, what's left?!? Even technical terms that were coined to express specifically Christian concepts like "trinity" are based on earlier roots.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #26 on: August 23, 2010, 09:42:35 AM »

Theophilos,

First, I think Greeks dont use immersion, but rather pouring.

Don't speak on a subject you're not authorized to speak on, my friend.  Greeks immerse when possible, pouring only when immersion is not possible or advisable.  Example of "not possible:" when baptizing an adult in a parish that only has a font designed for children.  Otherwise, immersion is done.

As for the OP: There is no "baptized again:" you were either baptized or not - if you weren't, then you must be batpized, and if you were, then you shouldn't force an empty ceremony which could lead to the priest's being defrocked and your being excommunicated.  IMO, based on the info you've provided, you were baptized, so don't fret any longer.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 09:46:06 AM by Fr. George » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #27 on: August 23, 2010, 09:59:29 AM »

Don't speak on a subject you're not authorized to speak on, my friend.  Greeks immerse when possible, pouring only when immersion is not possible or advisable.  Example of "not possible:" when baptizing an adult in a parish that only has a font designed for children.  Otherwise, immersion is done.

Do these parishes not have rivers around them?

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Seriously though, I would assume that perhaps pouring is necessary in more arid regions, or in the winter when local bodies of water are frozen, but the idea that a parish has to pour out of necessity because they "only have a font for babies" seems a bit ridiculous to me.
Logged
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #28 on: August 23, 2010, 10:07:26 AM »

Seriously though, I would assume that perhaps pouring is necessary in more arid regions, or in the winter when local bodies of water are frozen, but the idea that a parish has to pour out of necessity because they "only have a font for babies" seems a bit ridiculous to me.

From my experience of Greek churches, when full immersion is not possible (whatever the reason may be), water is nonetheless poured over the whole body rather than simply sprinkled on the head.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #29 on: August 23, 2010, 10:16:23 AM »

Do these parishes not have rivers around them?

Better question: are the rivers clean?

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

Seriously though, I would assume that perhaps pouring is necessary in more arid regions, or in the winter when local bodies of water are frozen, but the idea that a parish has to pour out of necessity because they "only have a font for babies" seems a bit ridiculous to me.

I guess it's a good thing you're not in a position to make decisions about baptisms, then, since a real problem seems "ridiculous" to you.  Every parish should have an adult font; I've seen some with large above-ground fonts, and a few with walk-in fonts.  But not every parish has one (especially since 95%+ of baptisms are performed on children), so the issue of "what to do with an adult baptism" becomes a real and serious question, not one to be confronted with dirty streams and horse troughs.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #30 on: August 23, 2010, 10:53:23 AM »

What is a horse?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #31 on: August 23, 2010, 11:05:42 AM »

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

Don't knock the horse trough. Some parishes do use one. I wasn't baptized in one, but I was baptized in a big metal basin that was intended for livestock. If it's a choice between using these or pouring, I don't see why the horse trough isn't preferable, aside from a knee-jerk "but that's for horses!" reaction that has no bearings on the vessel's actual suitability.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #32 on: August 23, 2010, 11:38:58 AM »

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

My parish uses a giant rubber tub. I'm scheduled to be dunked in it this Saturday, actually. Full immersion is preferable to pouring, as undignified as it might seem to those who require all baptismal fonts to made of precious metals and rubies.  Roll Eyes If pretense is more important than being faithful to tradition, then count me out.

I guess it's a good thing you're not in a position to make decisions about baptisms, then, since a real problem seems "ridiculous" to you.  Every parish should have an adult font; I've seen some with large above-ground fonts, and a few with walk-in fonts.  But not every parish has one (especially since 95%+ of baptisms are performed on children), so the issue of "what to do with an adult baptism" becomes a real and serious question, not one to be confronted with dirty streams and horse troughs.

Good, so just so we're clear, all of our streams are so dirty that baptisms become unsafe. Or are you just afraid of looking like the Baptists? None of them seem to be emerging from the water with a third arm.

And you're so above the "ridiculous" banter, with your circumlocutions decrying kiddie-pools in a dignified Greek Orthodox church. Roll Eyes  Give me a break.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 11:40:21 AM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,589



« Reply #33 on: August 23, 2010, 11:39:27 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.
 

Both my wife and I were baptized a year apart in a galvanized horse trough by the ROCOR.  And, it was brought into the Church each time for that purpose. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #34 on: August 23, 2010, 11:40:22 AM »

Would it therefore be possible to repeat my baptism in Greek or include the names Elohim YHWH into the ritual even if I can be baptized a second time in the Arabic Church through immersion?

No. Any priest or bishop that did so would be deposed, according to Apostolic Canon 47.

Your Baptism was performed within and accepted by the Holy Orthodox Church. Period.  You have also been sealed by Holy Chrism and are a communicant of the Holy Eucharist. You are an Orthodox Christian. Period. Full stop. There can be no further question.

Any doubts to the contrary are temptations from the devil, distracting you from the real work of salvation.

If you need further encouragement about the acceptability of your baptism, just read Canon 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council and Canon 95 of Trullo. According to these holy canons, even the baptisms of Arians, Nestorians, and Monophysites are acceptable to the Church. How could yours, performed by a canonical Orthodox priest, with the blessing of a canonical Orthodox bishop, not be?
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #35 on: August 23, 2010, 11:50:51 AM »

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

Both my wife and I were baptized a year apart in a galvanized horse trough by the ROCOR.  And, it was brought into the Church each time for that purpose. Where there is a will, there is a way.

As much as I find the use of an animal feeding device in a Church to be distasteful, I would prefer galvanized over rubber any day.  If it works for them, then may the Lord always bless it!
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,589



« Reply #36 on: August 23, 2010, 11:59:28 AM »


My parish uses a giant rubber tub. I'm scheduled to be dunked in it this Saturday, actually. Full immersion is preferable to pouring, as undignified as it might seem to those who require all baptismal fonts to made of precious metals and rubies.  Roll Eyes If pretense is more important than being faithful to tradition, then count me out.


Congratulations on your upcoming Baptism!  As to rivers, ours are a bit muddy, but I would have no problem being dunked in one.  I have gone swimming in much worse.  If you want Baptized in the Platte, you may have to look a bit to find a hole deep enough.  The joke is that the river is a mile wide and a foot deep.  As to "running" water, the Missouri runs mighty fast up here.  I don't think is slows down too much where you are.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #37 on: August 23, 2010, 12:04:36 PM »

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

My parish uses a giant rubber tub.

Glory to God for all things.

I'm scheduled to be dunked in it this Saturday, actually.

Entry into the Church is a beautiful thing, regardless of the surroundings or instruments used.  Congratulations!  Many years!

Full immersion is preferable to pouring,

I'm glad we agree.

as undignified as it might seem to those who require all baptismal fonts to made of precious metals and rubies.  Roll Eyes

Who said anything about that?  I find the use of a rubber trough to be disgusting, but if your parish uses it, then Glory to Him.  Take your straw man out of here.

If pretense is more important than being faithful to tradition, then count me out.

Me too.  What pretense are you speaking of?

Good, so just so we're clear, all of our streams are so dirty that baptisms become unsafe. Or are you just afraid of looking like the Baptists? None of them seem to be emerging from the water with a third arm.

Holy things for the holy, my friend.  If I lived by an ocean, I'd consider that a venue, but the rivers are frequently too polluted.  We should use the best things available to us - clean tap water over dirty water, etc.  It's not about safety, "3rd arms," etc..  Baptisms should be done in Churches, anyway - who am I to break the standard practice of the last 16 centuries?

And you're so above the "ridiculous" banter, with your circumlocutions decrying kiddie-pools in a dignified Greek Orthodox church. Roll Eyes  Give me a break. 

Maybe I'll give you a break after Saturday.  Until then, you're enrolled in the catechumenate and deciding to state, "the idea that a parish has to pour out of necessity because they "only have a font for babies" seems a bit ridiculous to me," - a bad sign, if you ask me.  I try to consider myself above the "ridiculous" banter - alas, though, I've heard of people bringing kiddie pools in Churches, and unfortunately have seen an Orthodox baptism on the "big screen" portrayed with the use of the kiddie pool (and a godmother oogling her godson to boot!).  Considering this, I figured it would be an easy example of something people are familiar with, and which some people would consider acceptable, that I would make a parallel to from my POV on "what's appropriate to use for baptisms."
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 12:05:17 PM by Fr. George » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,358


metron ariston


« Reply #38 on: August 23, 2010, 12:29:19 PM »

I'm scheduled to be dunked in it this Saturday, actually.

No dunking on this Saturday allowed, if we are to follow the practices of the early church. Baptism may only occur on Pascha, Pentecost, or (in the East) Theophany, the only exception being if you are about to die.  police

Also, just as an aside, there's reason to believe that "living water" referred to what one would get in a miqveh (ritual Jewish bathtub) or an equivalent Greek or Roman bath house. The early Christian baptisteries we have were built on top of Roman baths, complete with plumbing.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #39 on: August 23, 2010, 12:30:11 PM »

Do you have a picture of the trough? I have seen what I thought was just a metal bath tub used it also had a part at one end to hold candles I think. I wonder if it was really just a trough...

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.
 

Both my wife and I were baptized a year apart in a galvanized horse trough by the ROCOR.  And, it was brought into the Church each time for that purpose. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #40 on: August 23, 2010, 12:39:24 PM »

It is  dilemmas like this one, I can never understand.
You were baptized.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #41 on: August 23, 2010, 01:52:09 PM »

No dunking on this Saturday allowed, if we are to follow the practices of the early church. Baptism may only occur on Pascha, Pentecost, or (in the East) Theophany, the only exception being if you are about to die.  police

Also not most of the Twelve Great Feasts, nor censers, nor elaborately embroidered vestments, et cetera. I think the point you were making is that the triple immersion is not absolute; and that pouring is OK. I don't disagree, I was just saying that everything ought to be done to do a full immersion if possible.
Logged
Rosehip
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 2,760



« Reply #42 on: August 23, 2010, 02:11:53 PM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.
 

Both my wife and I were baptized a year apart in a galvanized horse trough by the ROCOR.  And, it was brought into the Church each time for that purpose. Where there is a will, there is a way.

Same here, Punch!  Smiley
Logged

+ Our dear sister Martha (Rosehip) passed away on Dec 20, 2010.  May her memory be eternal! +
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #43 on: August 23, 2010, 06:35:12 PM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #44 on: August 23, 2010, 06:35:12 PM »

Yet Allah is used as the personal name of the only and supreme deity in Islam.

Yes. But what makes you think that that is its origin? And that Arabic Christians before the rise of Islam did not use "Allah" to refer to our monotheistic God?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #45 on: August 23, 2010, 07:10:49 PM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.


OK! Pouring or sprinkling I always heard it was condemned,,It had to be Immersion three times.... Grin
Hope you don't have a grudge anything against me... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,635



« Reply #46 on: August 23, 2010, 07:26:51 PM »

Stashko,
AFAIK, the Serbs of Voivodina and Banat (including those in the Romanian Banat) have been routinely baptizing by pouring.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #47 on: August 23, 2010, 07:35:42 PM »

Stashko,
AFAIK, the Serbs of Voivodina and Banat (including those in the Romanian Banat) have been routinely baptizing by pouring.
Thanks for the info....
It is confusing,Holy Orthodoxy Has to get togeather and decide ,on either pouring ,sprinkling,or immersion,
and stick with it ,and no excuses to deviate from it....I like the music from romunska banat  and srbska banat, very good ... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2010, 08:48:41 PM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.


OK! Pouring or sprinkling I always heard it was condemned,,It had to be Immersion three times.... Grin
Hope you don't have a grudge anything against me... Grin

Well, I think it's true that triple immersion is the canonical norm which is expected when it is possible. However, the Didache does provide for pouring as acceptable when immersion is not possible. I actually received something sort of in between the two. Sprinkling, however, I do not think has ever been provided for.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2010, 10:53:02 PM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.  It should be noted that the trough is purchased new for the purpose of being used as a baptismal font.  In other words, nobody's getting the horses' water trough from a nearby pasture and rolling it into the church, or anything like that.  This is a clean and economical way to accomplish immersion baptism of adults, and is no less holy than one performed in a church that can afford a purpose-built adult-sized font.

If you still have a problem with it, well, I'm sad that anyone would put the fancy appearance of a font over the ability to perform the optimal practice of immersion.  Some parishes have to improvise in order to provide even a baby-sized font.

Seriously though, I would assume that perhaps pouring is necessary in more arid regions, or in the winter when local bodies of water are frozen, but the idea that a parish has to pour out of necessity because they "only have a font for babies" seems a bit ridiculous to me.

I guess it's a good thing you're not in a position to make decisions about baptisms, then, since a real problem seems "ridiculous" to you.  Every parish should have an adult font; I've seen some with large above-ground fonts, and a few with walk-in fonts.  But not every parish has one (especially since 95%+ of baptisms are performed on children), so the issue of "what to do with an adult baptism" becomes a real and serious question, not one to be confronted with dirty streams and horse troughs.

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using a horse trough.  Functionally, it's just a big tub that is just as holy and good for its purpose as any fancy, expensive pool that most parishes cannot afford to build.  

I was received into the church through Holy Baptism, which took place in a tub that was originally sold as a horse trough, but never used as such, as it was purchased to be used as a baptismal font.  That does NOT make my baptism any less holy or reverent than one that would have taken place in whatever font you would have approved of for my baptism.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 10:57:18 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #50 on: August 24, 2010, 01:03:15 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.
Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 01:06:32 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #51 on: August 24, 2010, 01:14:38 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #52 on: August 24, 2010, 01:25:48 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #53 on: August 24, 2010, 01:33:31 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.

Post a link or a picture Please....  It must be online.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #54 on: August 24, 2010, 01:46:44 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.

Post a link or a picture Please....  It must be online.... Grin
No.  I'm not going to post a picture to satisfy your judgmental demands.  I owe you no explanation of anything.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #55 on: August 24, 2010, 01:57:45 AM »

Can they not invest in a cheap rubber horse trough until they can afford a properly gold-guilded opulent baptistry?  Wink

Really, that's your solution?  Bring a horse trough in?  Please tell me that is a joke.  You bring a horse trough into my church, and you'll get the same response as someone bringing in an inflatable kiddie pool - right out the door with you.

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.

Indeed!  During the construction of my parish's current temple, we used a horse trough for adult baptisms until we could get a proper baptismal constructed in the narthex.  Of course, we also kept the horse trough outside and baptized people there rather than bring the trough into the church.  The current baptismal is itself not gilded or opulent, unlike Alveus's exaggerated caricatures; it's just a very simply constructed baptismal that fits the theme of simplicity that guided the design of our church.

Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...
Stashko, if you've never been to my church, you would be wise to keep silent rather than open your mouth in judgment of that which you do not know.

Post a link or a picture Please....  It must be online.... Grin
No.  I'm not going to post a picture to satisfy your judgmental demands.  I owe you no explanation of anything.

 Your Judging Me thinking I'm Judging which I'm not , I Said It sounds Like It....
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #56 on: August 24, 2010, 02:10:25 AM »

If Holy Orthodoxy condemns or did in the past and some do in the present, condemn Catholics from  sprinkling ,how can we justify using it....This Is Confusing .....Is It a Change introduced by the ecumenists....... Huh

We're not talking about sprinkling. Sprinkling means taking something like a whisk and flinging droplets of water onto the initiates head. Pouring is actually taking something more like a pitcher and pouring down volumes of water onto the person. The former hasn't really been addressed. The latter has been approved by some very ancient documents, at least in the case where immersion is not reasonably possible.


OK! Pouring or sprinkling I always heard it was condemned,,It had to be Immersion three times.... Grin
Hope you don't have a grudge anything against me... Grin

Well, I think it's true that triple immersion is the canonical norm which is expected when it is possible. However, the Didache does provide for pouring as acceptable when immersion is not possible. I actually received something sort of in between the two. Sprinkling, however, I do not think has ever been provided for.
A question...
Your really up on this religous stuff It's Amazing ...Can A Orthodox Lay Christian Baptize anyone ,Not  just  in a emergency Like Inpending death, But if someone requests it and will the church recognize it....
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #57 on: August 24, 2010, 09:33:29 AM »

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this. 

Glory to God for all things!

It should be noted that the trough is purchased new for the purpose of being used as a baptismal font.  In other words, nobody's getting the horses' water trough from a nearby pasture and rolling it into the church, or anything like that. 

That's a relief... jk.  I had assumed that this was the case in 100% of the cases.

This is a clean and economical way to accomplish immersion baptism of adults, and is no less holy than one performed in a church that can afford a purpose-built adult-sized font.

I would never think otherwise, and have not stated or implied anything to the contrary.

If you still have a problem with it, well, I'm sad that anyone would put the fancy appearance of a font over the ability to perform the optimal practice of immersion. 

Caricature much?  It has nothing to do with the appearance of the font, thank you very much; you can find my objections earlier in the thread.

Some parishes have to improvise in order to provide even a baby-sized font.

Glory to God that everyone who wishes to be Baptized is able to be Baptized!

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using a horse trough.  Functionally, it's just a big tub that is just as holy and good for its purpose as any fancy, expensive pool that most parishes cannot afford to build. 

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using Hawaiian bread as Prosforon; however, there are intent and form that are not congruent between the Hawaiian bread and Prosforon.  However, if a parish needs to use Hawaiian bread as Prosforon because people were not able or willing to make/bring it, then Glory to God - it will still become the Body of Christ.

I was received into the church through Holy Baptism, which took place in a tub that was originally sold as a horse trough, but never used as such, as it was purchased to be used as a baptismal font.  That does NOT make my baptism any less holy or reverent than one that would have taken place in whatever font you would have approved of for my baptism.

I have never stated or implied that your, or anyone else's, baptism was less valid, holy, or reverent than one performed in any sort of purpose-built baptismal font.  Take your straw man elsewhere.  In fact, I seem to recall your having to clarify a similar position elsewhere, so I figure you can get the gist of my argument and its real implications:

I didn't say priests in collars couldn't be holy.  I just really dislike that kind of clothing, both for itself and for the reasons it's worn by Orthodox priests.  I'd much rather see a priest in street clothes than a collar.

People seem to be taking this far too personally - if you were baptized in a trough, pool, river, lake, ocean, font, fountain, sewer, etc, you've still been baptized, receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit, entrance into the Body of Christ, washing of regeneration, and participation in His Crucifixion and Resurrection.  My personal opinion that a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism does not indicate a belief that anyone baptized in a horse trough has somehow received a less "holy or reverent" baptism. 
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 09:36:26 AM by Fr. George » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
NorthernPines
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 934



« Reply #58 on: August 24, 2010, 10:19:14 AM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.


Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #59 on: August 24, 2010, 10:59:03 AM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.




No ! Ididn't say that ,it's just the more ornate they are, the better i like them ,thats all.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,717


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2010, 02:05:08 PM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.




No ! Ididn't say that ,it's just the more ornate they are, the better i like them ,thats all.... Grin
But, speaking as a member of the parish whose temple you just disparaged, I can tell you that you spoke of something you know nothing about.  You cannot possibly be able to say, "have to stay away from that one," based on what little I said to describe my church.  For one, "simply" does NOT mean "bare bones"--that's a connection you made from reading my post, but I did not say that.  (Bare bones is also an adjective I would never use to describe my church.)  And for two, I really didn't say anything more about my church to give anyone any kind of idea what it DOES look like.  Rather than see you post disparaging comments about my church based on the extremely limited description I provided, I invite you to come and see.  Come and see for yourself what our church really looks like.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 02:05:29 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2010, 03:11:10 PM »


Sounds like a bare bone catholic church, have to stay away from that one...I prefer the heavily emblished Holy Orthodox churches,that ,really say , Im a Holy Orthodx Church.... Grin

Certainly you're not implying Churches that are less ornate are somehow less holy are you? After all, 1st-4th century Churches were pretty sparse often times, (with the exception of frescoes and icons) and the monasteries in the deserts were even less ornate. They did have some really cool baptismal "pools", but there was nothing pretty about them at all unless one really like stone work. (which I do, so I think they are beautiful)

BTW my parish also uses a horse trough because that's all our parish can afford. and yet, every priest that has seen to our parish has commented that it was one of the most beautiful and most traditionally styled Churches in the Metropolis. So having a horse trough and being a "bare bones" Church don't necessarily go hand in hand. Besides we simply don't have the space for an in ground baptismal font even if we had the money. There is just no place for it to go. A horse trough is certainly not the ideal solution, but people work with what they have.




No ! Ididn't say that ,it's just the more ornate they are, the better i like them ,thats all.... Grin
But, speaking as a member of the parish whose temple you just disparaged, I can tell you that you spoke of something you know nothing about.  You cannot possibly be able to say, "have to stay away from that one," based on what little I said to describe my church.  For one, "simply" does NOT mean "bare bones"--that's a connection you made from reading my post, but I did not say that.  (Bare bones is also an adjective I would never use to describe my church.)  And for two, I really didn't say anything more about my church to give anyone any kind of idea what it DOES look like.  Rather than see you post disparaging comments about my church based on the extremely limited description I provided, I invite you to come and see.  Come and see for yourself what our church really looks like.

Hey ! I remember if im right,You Posted Something in another posting about your Parish /church ,ill have to look up your older posts and see for myself what it looks like, where it is ,and maybe pay a visit there when i get some free time... Grin
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 03:39:02 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2010, 04:02:31 PM »

As others have pointed out, many parishes do this.  

Glory to God for all things!

It should be noted that the trough is purchased new for the purpose of being used as a baptismal font.  In other words, nobody's getting the horses' water trough from a nearby pasture and rolling it into the church, or anything like that.  

That's a relief... jk.  I had assumed that this was the case in 100% of the cases.

This is a clean and economical way to accomplish immersion baptism of adults, and is no less holy than one performed in a church that can afford a purpose-built adult-sized font.

I would never think otherwise, and have not stated or implied anything to the contrary.

If you still have a problem with it, well, I'm sad that anyone would put the fancy appearance of a font over the ability to perform the optimal practice of immersion.  

Caricature much?  It has nothing to do with the appearance of the font, thank you very much; you can find my objections earlier in the thread.

Some parishes have to improvise in order to provide even a baby-sized font.

Glory to God that everyone who wishes to be Baptized is able to be Baptized!

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using a horse trough.  Functionally, it's just a big tub that is just as holy and good for its purpose as any fancy, expensive pool that most parishes cannot afford to build.  

There is nothing dirty or wrong about using Hawaiian bread as Prosforon; however, there are intent and form that are not congruent between the Hawaiian bread and Prosforon.  However, if a parish needs to use Hawaiian bread as Prosforon because people were not able or willing to make/bring it, then Glory to God - it will still become the Body of Christ.

There is simply no equating a horse trough font with a "dirty stream" like you did.  This kind of object is manufactured and sold because it's useful for providing water to livestock, but the bottom line is that IT'S JUST A BIG TUB.  Why would it be any different from any other vessel that holds 150 gallons of water?

I was received into the church through Holy Baptism, which took place in a tub that was originally sold as a horse trough, but never used as such, as it was purchased to be used as a baptismal font.  That does NOT make my baptism any less holy or reverent than one that would have taken place in whatever font you would have approved of for my baptism.

I have never stated or implied that your, or anyone else's, baptism was less valid, holy, or reverent than one performed in any sort of purpose-built baptismal font.  Take your straw man elsewhere.  In fact, I seem to recall your having to clarify a similar position elsewhere, so I figure you can get the gist of my argument and its real implications:

I didn't say priests in collars couldn't be holy.  I just really dislike that kind of clothing, both for itself and for the reasons it's worn by Orthodox priests.  I'd much rather see a priest in street clothes than a collar.

People seem to be taking this far too personally - if you were baptized in a trough, pool, river, lake, ocean, font, fountain, sewer, etc, you've still been baptized, receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit, entrance into the Body of Christ, washing of regeneration, and participation in His Crucifixion and Resurrection.  My personal opinion that a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism does not indicate a belief that anyone baptized in a horse trough has somehow received a less "holy or reverent" baptism.  

Holy straw men, Batman!  That is a completely different situation.  My comments about clergy dress are about priests who deliberately choose to dress up as heterodox clergy.  The situations would *only* be comparable if parishes were having their adult-size baptismal fonts filled in with cement, and using horse troughs instead.  Every priest who can get his hands on a collar and suit has the means to get a cassock.  Not every parish has the means to build a baptistery.  

And yes, I do think you imply some baptisms are holier than others, despite your protests to the contrary, when you say things like "a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism".  A purpose-built adult-size font is either a tank above ground, or a hole in the ground.  The only thing making it holier than any other tank or hole is the fact that it's used for baptisms.  Why should a big tub used for baptisms be any different?
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 04:03:08 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #63 on: August 24, 2010, 11:23:07 PM »

There is simply no equating a horse trough font with a "dirty stream" like you did.  This kind of object is manufactured and sold because it's useful for providing water to livestock, but the bottom line is that IT'S JUST A BIG TUB.  Why would it be any different from any other vessel that holds 150 gallons of water?

I've given my reasons before.  You don't like them, fine - you don't have to.  But repeating your question over and over is not going to elicit a different response from me.

Holy straw men, Batman!  That is a completely different situation.  My comments about clergy dress are about priests who deliberately choose to dress up as heterodox clergy.  The situations would *only* be comparable if parishes were having their adult-size baptismal fonts filled in with cement, and using horse troughs instead.  Every priest who can get his hands on a collar and suit has the means to get a cassock.  Not every parish has the means to build a baptistery. 

I didn't equate the situations to which our comments were directed, only the situations that arose from our comments.  ISTM you are unwilling or unable to continue in a rational discussion on this subject.

And yes, I do think you imply some baptisms are holier than others, despite your protests to the contrary, when you say things like "a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism".

Even though I have stated both that I did not imply that some are holier, and have gone out of my way explicitly to state that none are holier than others, you choose to believe that I said something different than what was plainly stated.  Why should I believe that you are willing or able to continue a rational discussion on the subject matter when you choose to interpret my intent differently than how I explicitly explained it?  Do you think I am being facetious when I say "Glory to God for all things?"  Do you think I am toying with you when I state that those baptized in a "trough, pool, river, lake, ocean, font, fountain, sewer, etc," have received the same baptism?  God forbid!  If I were, I would be called to account for it at the Second Coming, and I would have no answer to give.  You could have been baptized in a disease-infested mud hole - but if you have been baptized, then your baptism is equal in holiness, reverence, grace, etc. to someone baptized in the most opulent font at the Cathedral in Moscow.  If you continue to choose to state that I somehow imply otherwise, fine, but I'm not going to continue attempting a rational dialogue with you here if you choose to do so contrary to the explicitly stated intent.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #64 on: August 25, 2010, 09:47:26 PM »

There is simply no equating a horse trough font with a "dirty stream" like you did.  This kind of object is manufactured and sold because it's useful for providing water to livestock, but the bottom line is that IT'S JUST A BIG TUB.  Why would it be any different from any other vessel that holds 150 gallons of water?

I've given my reasons before.  You don't like them, fine - you don't have to.  But repeating your question over and over is not going to elicit a different response from me.

You called it disgusting and distasteful to use an "animal feeding device".  

I pointed out that a "horse trough" used as a baptismal font is not, in fact, an animal feeding device at all.

You respond by stating that I am

unwilling or unable to continue in a rational discussion on this subject.

I therefore respond by stating my perplexity that you did not respond to the statement that the object in question is not, in fact, an "animal feeding device", but in fact a big tub that may have been sold with that purpose in mind but has never been used as such, and instead chose to accuse me of not being able to respond rationally to you.

Here's what I'm getting out of all this:
You:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Me:  "It's not an animal feeding device."
You:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."

And yes, I do think you imply some baptisms are holier than others, despite your protests to the contrary, when you say things like "a horse trough does not belong in the Church for use in baptism".

Even though I have stated both that I did not imply that some are holier, and have gone out of my way explicitly to state that none are holier than others, you choose to believe that I said something different than what was plainly stated.  Why should I believe that you are willing or able to continue a rational discussion on the subject matter when you choose to interpret my intent differently than how I explicitly explained it?

It is not an uncommon condition to have a way of thinking that leads to a conclusion that is different from what one is willing to explicitly state.  

You may resist thinking that some baptisms are holier than others because you do think it's wrong to think such things, but it is quite possible to look at how you have explained your resistance to horse troughs (or if you prefer, "large tubs that happen to be sold with livestock hydration in mind but are no more specific to that purpose than any other large tub that holds liquid") and reach a different conclusion.

I don't doubt your sincerity, but I think there is a discrepancy you're not conscious of, and I think you should work through it instead of casting aspersions upon me.

If you choose to continue to think that a horse trough is invariably an animal feeding device and therefore not proper to be used in church, that's fine.  

In that case, I would like to point out that an animal feeding device was good enough for Baby Jesus to be born in, so I think it's fine for me to be born in, too.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 09:57:41 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2010, 10:23:04 PM »

You called it disgusting and distasteful to use an "animal feeding device". 

I pointed out that a "horse trough" used as a baptismal font is not, in fact, an animal feeding device at all.

You respond by stating that I am

unwilling or unable to continue in a rational discussion on this subject.

I therefore respond by stating my perplexity that you did not respond to the statement that the object in question is not, in fact, an "animal feeding device", but in fact a big tub that may have been sold with that purpose in mind but has never been used as such, and instead chose to accuse me of not being able to respond rationally to you.

Here's what I'm getting out of all this:
You:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Me:  "It's not an animal feeding device."
You:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."

Let's take a somewhat analogous situation (notice the qualifier), shall we?  Yes, it exists in the realm of the hypothetical (IME), but bear with me.

Parishes are supposed to use chalices (designed for the purpose of holding and distributing the gifts) to perform Divine Liturgies.  In case you haven't checked or noticed, Orthodox chalices are expensive.  Any proper drinking device (glass, wine glass, goblet) could theoretically be used if a parish were formed and did not have the means (either financial, or for procurement) to receive the gifts.  Say a parishioner has a goblet, plainly styled, that they are willing to donate for use; it is unused.  Similarly, another parishioner has a very large stein that they are willing to donate; it is also unused.  If I were the priest in the parish, I would say that using a stein for communion is distasteful, and I would rather use the smaller goblet.  My choice of the goblet would likely mean that, in this parish, people receive only a small amount of the Body and Blood, rather than a more sizable amount that could be afforded in the larger stein.

When speaking to a visitor, they explain to me that in their parish, formed under similar circumstances and experiencing a similar chalice-related problem, they chose a stein because they felt that it better fit their purposes.  Their choice of the stein does not make the act (Divine Liturgy) any less holy, reverent, etc. - it's still the Body and Blood of Christ.  My personal opinion that a stein isn't an appropriate vessel for the Blood of Christ does not mean that it is impossible to be used, or that it somehow desecrates the sacrament.  It's the same Body and Blood, period.  Full stop.  Same Liturgy, same Christ, same communion, same Church.

So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays.  If someone decides to use it, then Glory to God for all things.

It is not an uncommon condition to have a way of thinking that leads to a conclusion that is different from what one is willing to explicitly state. 

I am perfectly willing to state my opinion on subjects, even the most uncomfortable ones.  I try my best to be clear as to what my intentions are.  I have been more than clear in my intentions, but you have decided to interpret my statements in a manner differing from my own explicit instructions on how to interpret them.  It is not an uncommon condition to read other people's statements and draw unusual or unreasonable conclusions based on that.

You may resist thinking that some baptisms are holier than others because you do think it's wrong to think such things, but it is quite possible to look at how you have explained your resistance to horse troughs (or if you prefer, "large tubs that happen to be sold with livestock hydration in mind but are no more specific to that purpose than any other large tub that holds liquid") and reach a different conclusion.

You could also look at my hands and hear me explain that I hold things with them, and use them to communicate and form personal bonds through touch, and conclude that I use them to kill because they have the potential to be dangerous.  Potential /= (or if you prefer, "does not equal") reality.

I don't doubt your sincerity, but I think there is a discrepancy you're not conscious of, and I think you should work through it instead of casting aspersions upon me.

There is no cognitive (or otherwise) dissonance here, no discrepancy.  I have many thousands of personal faults to work through, but your perception of dissonance between my statements and my stated intent on issues of baptismal fonts is not one of them, since it is an issue that exists only in your view, not in reality.

If you choose to continue to think that a horse trough is invariably an animal feeding device and therefore not proper to be used in church.  That's fine. 

Actually, I don't think all horse troughs are invariably animal feeding devices; I think many are used for animal bathing, long-term storage of liquids, distillation of alcohol, etc.  That doesn't change the fact that it was designed to be used for equine hydration... Wait, why should I repeat my argument again, just because you've found a more creative way of misrepresenting my otherwise clear and explicit statements?

In that case, I would like to point out that an animal feeding device was good enough for Baby Jesus to be born in, so I think it's fine for me to be born in, too.

I'm glad you were born from above through Water and the Spirit in the adult font of your parish - your entry into the Body of Christ is a banner day, regardless of the means, location, etc.  As for your comment on the Lord's birth: There is nothing filthier for an infinite being than the dirtiness of finite existence; one you get past that point, everything else is gravy.  The Lord's being born in a cave and lain in a manger was the least unusual part of the Incarnation-Life-Passion-Crucifixion-Death cycle.  But He represents extreme humility, and I don't, so I will work harder at it. 

Aside: Baby Jesus?  Are we having a Talladega Nights moment here? Wink
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,589



« Reply #66 on: August 25, 2010, 10:34:19 PM »


Parishes are supposed to use chalices (designed for the purpose of holding and distributing the gifts) to perform Divine Liturgies.  In case you haven't checked or noticed, Orthodox chalices are expensive.  Any proper drinking device (glass, wine glass, goblet) could theoretically be used if a parish were formed and did not have the means (either financial, or for procurement) to receive the gifts.  Say a parishioner has a goblet, plainly styled, that they are willing to donate for use; it is unused.  Similarly, another parishioner has a very large stein that they are willing to donate; it is also unused.  If I were the priest in the parish, I would say that using a stein for communion is distasteful, and I would rather use the smaller goblet.  My choice of the goblet would likely mean that, in this parish, people receive only a small amount of the Body and Blood, rather than a more sizable amount that could be afforded in the larger stein.

When speaking to a visitor, they explain to me that in their parish, formed under similar circumstances and experiencing a similar chalice-related problem, they chose a stein because they felt that it better fit their purposes.  Their choice of the stein does not make the act (Divine Liturgy) any less holy, reverent, etc. - it's still the Body and Blood of Christ.  My personal opinion that a stein isn't an appropriate vessel for the Blood of Christ does not mean that it is impossible to be used, or that it somehow desecrates the sacrament.  It's the same Body and Blood, period.  Full stop.  Same Liturgy, same Christ, same communion, same Church.



As a German, I find the above most disturbing.  I believe a stein to be the ultimate vessel.  Stein, meaning "rock" brings to mind Peter's Faith, and has a sound of power befitting the miraculous event taking place.  Goblet, on the other hand, sounds . . . well . . . kind of lame.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #67 on: August 25, 2010, 10:58:13 PM »

As a German, I find the above most disturbing.  I believe a stein to be the ultimate vessel.  Stein, meaning "rock" brings to mind Peter's Faith, and has a sound of power befitting the miraculous event taking place.  Goblet, on the other hand, sounds . . . well . . . kind of lame.

LOL.  Thank you for this; it's been a long night, short on levity. 
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #68 on: August 25, 2010, 11:28:57 PM »


So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays. 

Not every parish is awash with Greek money.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #69 on: August 25, 2010, 11:51:29 PM »

So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays. 
Not every parish is awash with Greek money. 

Ahh, thrust a stereotype into the conversation to try and win points.  Old trick, old result - no dice.  I've seen fonts designed by parishioners, crafted with their own hands; no one said anything about having gold, silver, platinum, marble, etc. fonts.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #70 on: August 26, 2010, 12:14:43 AM »

Metropolitan Amphilochios (EP) is determined to baptize the whole country, Catholics included.  He is busy building baptismal troughs everywhere.

Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #71 on: August 26, 2010, 01:01:57 PM »

Metropolitan Amphilochios (EP) is determined to baptize the whole country, Catholics included.  He is busy building baptismal troughs everywhere.

Glory to God!  A few of his spiritual children who are priests here in the U.S. are moving your way (I think, though, ultimately to go to Fiji) to assist him in his quest.

(Btw: If it's built with the purpose of being an adult font, then it's a font, not a trough.  Calling something that was plainly designed for baptism a "trough" seems to be either a joke, or an attempt to stir the pot.)
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #72 on: August 26, 2010, 01:45:47 PM »

Here's what I'm getting out of all this:
You:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Me:  "It's not an animal feeding device."
You:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."

You've missed a few steps...  For the sake of consistency, I'll use your existing lines from above, even if I don't agree fully with the caricature.

Fr. G:  "Horse trough baptismal fonts are distasteful because it is unseemly to use an animal feeding device in a church."
Orual:  "It's not an animal feeding device.  It's a bowl that happens to be used for animal feeding"
Fr. G: "Yes, but it's designed & sold with the purpose of feeding animals."
Orual: "But it's never been used to feed animals.  It's a bowl that was intended for feeding animals, but has only been used for baptisms."
Fr. G: "I don't like it (the trough), but the baptisms are equal anyway."
Orual: "You don't think the baptisms are equal."
Fr. G:  "You're incapable of discussing this rationally."
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #73 on: August 26, 2010, 02:57:46 PM »

In Syriac, the word for God in the Trisagion is Alloho. I imagine it just means "the God" in Syriac as Al'lah does in Arabic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dlGR94v720
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #74 on: August 26, 2010, 04:44:44 PM »

So similarly with the Horse Trough.  Yes, it is a metal tub, and if it's never used to feed animals, then who cares, right?  But it wasn't designed or intended to be a baptismal font, so I guess I'm a bit old fashioned in wanting to use something designed and intended to be a font - we do have that luxury nowadays.  
Not every parish is awash with Greek money.  

Ahh, thrust a stereotype into the conversation to try and win points.  Old trick, old result - no dice.  I've seen fonts designed by parishioners, crafted with their own hands; no one said anything about having gold, silver, platinum, marble, etc. fonts.

Again, parishioners with the time, skill, and resources to do this are not in every parish.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2010, 04:46:22 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #75 on: August 26, 2010, 05:15:03 PM »

Metropolitan Amphilochios (EP) is determined to baptize the whole country, Catholics included.  He is busy building baptismal troughs everywhere.

Glory to God!  A few of his spiritual children who are priests here in the U.S. are moving your way (I think, though, ultimately to go to Fiji) to assist him in his quest.

(Btw: If it's built with the purpose of being an adult font, then it's a font, not a trough.  Calling something that was plainly designed for baptism a "trough" seems to be either a joke, or an attempt to stir the pot.)

There is a third possibility.  I have spent 30 years wandering this country baptizing people in cow troughs and bathtubs, just as my holy Russian predecessor did.  Needs must.... laugh laugh
Logged
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #76 on: August 26, 2010, 05:22:42 PM »

The Orthodox Church of Antioch (Antakya) is a canonical church, and they always used the word "Allah", since they adopted the Arabic language. The same is true for the holy churches of Jerusalem and Alexandria.

There is no problem with the word "Allah", it just means "al-ilah", "the God", like the Bible says in Greek "ho theos". Of course, the religion of Islam contains many errors and their view of God is certainly false. But the well-established Orthodox use of the word "Allah", which goes back to St. John of Damascus, has nothing to do with the beliefs of Islam, only which the Arabic language, which uses the word "Allah" for "the (one) God" .

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #77 on: August 26, 2010, 05:34:59 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #78 on: August 26, 2010, 05:37:43 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Not much more than Islam is an offshoot of Christianity.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #79 on: August 26, 2010, 05:39:54 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Not exactly... they recognize Muhammad as an earlier prophet, but also Buddha... I would say that Baha'i has probably more of Kant than of Islam.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #80 on: August 26, 2010, 06:00:58 PM »


Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

Actually, Allah was also the NAME of the Meccan pagans' chief god. This was why Mohammad's pagan father had the name Abdallah, which means slave of Allah.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #81 on: August 26, 2010, 06:02:44 PM »


Not much more than Islam is an offshoot of Christianity.

Islam is an offshoot of Rabbinical Judaism+Meccan paganism+heretical sects of Christianity.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #82 on: August 26, 2010, 06:09:23 PM »

Actually, Allah was also the NAME of the Meccan pagans' chief god. This was why Mohammad's pagan father had the name Abdallah, which means slave of Allah.  Wink

This is true. But pagans in Old testament times also used the name "El" (Old Testament name for God) for a pagan God.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #83 on: August 26, 2010, 06:16:32 PM »


This is true. But pagans in Old testament times also used the name "El" (Old Testament name for God) for a pagan God.

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #84 on: August 26, 2010, 06:21:35 PM »

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)

Indeed, but the Christian equivalent (going back to the Septuagint) of "I am" is "ho kyrios"/"the LORD". And just as the Old Testament has El and "I am", the Orthodox Church has theos and kyrios, God and Lord, Allah and al-rabb...
Logged
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,589



« Reply #85 on: August 26, 2010, 06:49:33 PM »

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)

Indeed, but the Christian equivalent (going back to the Septuagint) of "I am" is "ho kyrios"/"the LORD". And just as the Old Testament has El and "I am", the Orthodox Church has theos and kyrios, God and Lord, Allah and al-rabb...

Come on people, we all know that God speaks German.  At least that is what I heard when I was growing up.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #86 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:29 PM »

Can A Orthodox Lay Christian Baptize anyone ,Not  just  in a emergency Like Inpending death, But if someone requests it and will the church recognize it....

If a Priest is actually available? I couldn't possibly understand why one would even seek to deviate from the Sacramental norm if it is not necessary. I think most Orthodox Christians would be highly skeptical of such a desire.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #87 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:29 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Yes.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #88 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:30 PM »

Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

But isn't Baha'i an offshoot of Islam?

Not much more than Islam is an offshoot of Christianity.

Ah, no. Baha'i came straight out of a staunchly Muslim society. The same cannot at all be said about Islam with Christianity.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #89 on: August 26, 2010, 09:23:30 PM »


Actually, also other monotheist religions such as Judaism and Baha'i use the term "Allah" when speaking Arabic.

Actually, Allah was also the NAME of the Meccan pagans' chief god. This was why Mohammad's pagan father had the name Abdallah, which means slave of Allah.  Wink

Yes, and it was also the name that Arabic Christians used to refer to God (there were Arabic speaking Christians even before the rise of Islam). Which just proves that it is a generic term for the deity that one believes to be the only god.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #90 on: August 27, 2010, 02:35:32 AM »

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)

Indeed, but the Christian equivalent (going back to the Septuagint) of "I am" is "ho kyrios"/"the LORD". And just as the Old Testament has El and "I am", the Orthodox Church has theos and kyrios, God and Lord, Allah and al-rabb...

I personally believe that translating the sentence I AM THAT I AM into Greek as Kyrios o Theos was not accurate since the Greek words fail to be the exact equivalent of the name occurring in Exodus 3. Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is. (Muslims also use the word Allah in every language). Another possibility: Let's have the exact literal translation of the sentence I AM THAT I AM in Greek. (Something like Egw eimi...)
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #91 on: August 27, 2010, 02:58:06 AM »

Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is.

Maybe we should just stick to the means of worship that our holy and God-bearing fathers have given us.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #92 on: August 27, 2010, 03:08:10 AM »

Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is.

Maybe we should just stick to the means of worship that our holy and God-bearing fathers have given us.

I am talking about language and translations rather than "the means of worship" handed down to us.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #93 on: August 27, 2010, 03:13:40 AM »

Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is.

Maybe we should just stick to the means of worship that our holy and God-bearing fathers have given us.

I am talking about language and translations rather than "the means of worship" handed down to us.  Wink

Dobro Jutro.... Grin Good Morning 2:10 am here chicago time...
How is it translated the correct way in greek ....
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #94 on: August 27, 2010, 03:16:55 AM »

Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is.

Maybe we should just stick to the means of worship that our holy and God-bearing fathers have given us.

I am talking about language and translations rather than "the means of worship" handed down to us.  Wink

Dobro Jutro.... Grin Good Morning 2:10 am here chicago time...
How is it translated the correct way in greek ....

Dobro jutro i tebi, brate  Grin

I do not know how it could be accurately translated into Greek, but I am sure some Greek-speaking person from this forum would like to help.  angel
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #95 on: August 27, 2010, 03:23:05 AM »

Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is.

Maybe we should just stick to the means of worship that our holy and God-bearing fathers have given us.

I am talking about language and translations rather than "the means of worship" handed down to us.  Wink

Dobro Jutro.... Grin Good Morning 2:10 am here chicago time...
How is it translated the correct way in greek ....

Dobro jutro i tebi, brate  Grin

I do not know how it could be accurately translated into Greek, but I am sure some Greek-speaking person from this forum would like to help.  angel


In serbian  .....  Ja sam koji  Sam    I am Who I Am... or the way you wrote it... Ja sam Sto  Sam     I Am That I Am
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 03:31:38 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #96 on: August 27, 2010, 03:30:21 AM »


In serbian  .....  Ja sam koji  Sam    I am Who I Am... or the way you wrote it... Ja sam Sto Sam     I Am That I Am

It sounds great in Serbian. Maybe this usage must be introduced into the Orthodox worship.  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #97 on: August 27, 2010, 03:38:53 AM »


In serbian  .....  Ja sam koji  Sam    I am Who I Am... or the way you wrote it... Ja sam Sto Sam     I Am That I Am

It sounds great in Serbian. Maybe this usage must be introduced into the Orthodox worship.  Grin


I ommited the I's  ja's In both Of my translations ....Are they actually part of original, translated in english...

There a few ways it can be said in serbian it also must be true  in greek....  thats why  probably the confusion...
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 03:43:05 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #98 on: August 27, 2010, 03:47:24 AM »

You speak turkish ..there must be a few way it can be said also...Am i right.... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #99 on: August 27, 2010, 05:24:12 AM »

You speak turkish ..there must be a few way it can be said also...Am i right.... Grin

Da, brate. You are right.  Grin

Turkish translation: BEN BEN OLANIM.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #100 on: August 27, 2010, 07:45:44 AM »

I personally believe that translating the sentence I AM THAT I AM into Greek as Kyrios o Theos was not accurate since the Greek words fail to be the exact equivalent of the name occurring in Exodus 3. Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is. (Muslims also use the word Allah in every language). Another possibility: Let's have the exact literal translation of the sentence I AM THAT I AM in Greek. (Something like Egw eimi...)

Using "Allah" instead of "Tanri" in the Turkish language is more of a political thing. I can tell you that Moroccan Berbers do not use "Allah" in their language.

As for "accuracy" of translation, I would like to remind you that this is not philology, but the Septuagint was translated under guidance of the Holy Spirit. To use "Lord" is pretty much universally accepted. Actually, even Jews speaking Hebrew will use "Adonai" (Lord) instead of YHWH, because the name YHWH is not meant for everyday use. Jews believe, that only the High Priest in the Temple should prononce the name "YHWH", and that is also why there is quite a controversy today how the name should actually be pronounced.

Anyway, as Orthodox Christians, it is essential that we trust the tradition of the church.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #101 on: August 27, 2010, 08:42:50 AM »

This is true, but GOD also said the following in the Old Testament:

I am that I am. You must say this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to you'. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation. (Exodus 3:14-15)

Indeed, but the Christian equivalent (going back to the Septuagint) of "I am" is "ho kyrios"/"the LORD". And just as the Old Testament has El and "I am", the Orthodox Church has theos and kyrios, God and Lord, Allah and al-rabb...

I personally believe that translating the sentence I AM THAT I AM into Greek as Kyrios o Theos was not accurate since the Greek words fail to be the exact equivalent of the name occurring in Exodus 3. Maybe we should use the word YHWH in our worship no matter what our mother tongue is. (Muslims also use the word Allah in every language). Another possibility: Let's have the exact literal translation of the sentence I AM THAT I AM in Greek. (Something like Egw eimi...)


Or let's just trust that our God-bearing Fathers had a better idea of how to render things than we do.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #102 on: August 27, 2010, 11:49:04 AM »

There is a third possibility.  I have spent 30 years wandering this country baptizing people in cow troughs and bathtubs, just as my holy Russian predecessor did.  Needs must.... laugh laugh

Yes, they must.  People thirst for the faith, and cannot be denied!
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,094


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #103 on: August 27, 2010, 11:50:19 AM »

Ahh, thrust a stereotype into the conversation to try and win points.  Old trick, old result - no dice.  I've seen fonts designed by parishioners, crafted with their own hands; no one said anything about having gold, silver, platinum, marble, etc. fonts.
Again, parishioners with the time, skill, and resources to do this are not in every parish. 

That is true, and no potential member of the Body of Christ should be penalized for that.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #104 on: August 27, 2010, 01:41:22 PM »


Or let's just trust that our God-bearing Fathers had a better idea of how to render things than we do.

and like our God-bearing Fathers, let's avoid invoking the names of false and pagan deities.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #105 on: August 27, 2010, 01:45:22 PM »


Anyway, as Orthodox Christians, it is essential that we trust the tradition of the church.

I hope the Orthodox tradition does not stipulate that we pray to Allah in our liturgies. Wink

So far I have come across no Church father that said: "Allah is the same as Adonai YHWH" or "Allah means the God in Arabic, so there is nothing wrong with using that name in our Church".
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #106 on: August 27, 2010, 01:46:59 PM »


Or let's just trust that our God-bearing Fathers had a better idea of how to render things than we do.

and like our God-bearing Fathers, let's avoid invoking the names of false and pagan deities.  Wink

It's already been demonstrated again and again that "Allah" is not the name of a pagan deity.

Once again, the words "God" and "Theos" were also one time used for pagan deities.

It's frustrating that you continue to ignore these simple facts.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 01:49:04 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #107 on: August 27, 2010, 01:58:08 PM »



It's already been demonstrated again and again that "Allah" is not the name of a pagan deity.

No, I have not seen that yet. The only thing I have been told over and over is that the word Allah means the God in Arabic, but no evidence for that speculation has shown up.  Roll Eyes

Once again, the words "God" and "Theos" were also one time used for pagan deities.


Now pagan deities are extinct and not invoked except the false god of Meccan paganism.

Your example is not relevant to our discussion because I have already proven that Allah does not mean God in Arabic. The equivalent of the English word "GOD" is "ILAH", not Allah.  Wink

Once again: The Nicene creed reads "true God from true God" in English and "ILAH haq min ILAH haq" in Arabic. I cannot see the word Allah in that line. Why is that?  Roll Eyes

It's frustrating that you continue to ignore these simple facts.

I have no facts to ignore, but only assumptions.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #108 on: August 27, 2010, 02:13:44 PM »


I hope the Orthodox tradition does not stipulate that we pray to Allah in our liturgies. Wink
The tradition of Arabic-speaking Orthodoxy is to pray To "Allah", who is defined as "al ab wal ibn wal ruh al qudus".

When Arabic-speaking Orthodox Christians pray to "Allah", they do not refer to the same concept of God as Muslims.


Both Christians and Muslims use an Arabic word, but mean different things. What is so difficult to unterstand about it? When CHP says "freedom" (özgürlük), they mean the freedom to be without headscarf. When AKP says freedom, they mean the freedom to be WITH headscarf. Same word, opposite meaning.
Logged
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #109 on: August 27, 2010, 02:15:14 PM »

Allah in Arabic is simply ilah with definite article. Allah and ilah are like ho theos and theos in Greek.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #110 on: August 27, 2010, 02:25:15 PM »


Both Christians and Muslims use an Arabic word, but mean different things. What is so difficult to unterstand about it? When CHP says "freedom" (özgürlük), they mean the freedom to be without headscarf. When AKP says freedom, they mean the freedom to be WITH headscarf. Same word, opposite meaning.

Can I follow this example and pray to Apollon, having in mind the true God of Christianity? Or would it be wrong for me to pray to Apollon no matter how I strive to prove that MY Apollon is different from THE Apollon of the Greek mythology?  Roll Eyes
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #111 on: August 27, 2010, 02:32:27 PM »

Allah in Arabic is simply ilah with definite article. Allah and ilah are like ho theos and theos in Greek.

Do we have the word OTHEOS in Greek? Can we attach the definite article to the word Theos and produce a new word?

Does Arabic have other examples for the invention of new names through the contraction of the definite article? Not that I know. For instance, in Arabic Masih means anointed/Christ. With the definite article it is Al Masih. However, it is never spelled Almasih! Rab means Lord in Arabic. Al Rab: The Lord. Yet Arabic does not have the word Alrab.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #112 on: August 27, 2010, 02:50:19 PM »

Theophilos,

It is very clear to me that you are not familiar with the Arabic language at all. In the Arabic script, the article is ALWAYS attached to the word (and that includes "almasih"). In many cases, it is assimilated in pronounciation, like "arrahman".

Allah is not a new word, it simply means "the God". Pagans used this terminology to describe the main God, monotheists to describe the one God.

"ho theos" in the Bible is used the same way. And by the way, the early Bible manuscripts containes no spaces between words at all. If we write today "ho theos" instead of "hotheos", that is a convention that dates from much later.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #113 on: August 27, 2010, 03:15:04 PM »

Theophilos,

It is very clear to me that you are not familiar with the Arabic language at all. In the Arabic script, the article is ALWAYS attached to the word (and that includes "almasih"). In many cases, it is assimilated in pronounciation, like "arrahman".

I fail to understand your point. Sad

I wonder if Arabic has the word "Arrahman" IN ADDITION to the word Rahman. Arabs do not use the words Allah and Ilah interchangeably. In English we say "We believe in one God" and "God created the world". There is no definite article in these two sentences. However, Arabs use the word ILAH in the first, but ALLAH in the second. Why is this difference? Even when the word God is used with no definite article, Arabs use Allah instead of ilah. What is their reason?

There is no Arrahman in the Arabic lexicon, but only Rahman with its article. There is, however, a separate entry for the word Allah in Arabic dictionaries.

Do we have a separate word spelled Thegod in English dictionaries? Can you find it when you go to section T instead of G?

Allah is not a new word, it simply means "the God". Pagans used this terminology to describe the main God, monotheists to describe the one God.

I disagree. If you have BOTH the words Allah and Ilah in your language and if you have rules determining their distinct usage, they cannot be the same word.

"ho theos" in the Bible is used the same way. And by the way, the early Bible manuscripts containes no spaces between words at all. If we write today "ho theos" instead of "hotheos", that is a convention that dates from much later.

The same problem here.

We say "Πιστεύω εἰς ἕνα Θεόν" with no article.

Καὶ εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ (definite article, but not the word OTHEOS". Tou Theou are separate. We have neither the word Otheos or Toutheou in Greek.

Σῶσον ἡμᾶς, Υἱὲ Θεοῦ (no article again!)

Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #114 on: August 27, 2010, 03:36:10 PM »

There is no Arrahman in the Arabic lexicon, but only Rahman with its article. There is, however, a separate entry for the word Allah in Arabic dictionaries.
Have you ever even seen an Arabic lexicon? Here is the entry for "arrahman" in the Arabic Wikipedia. http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%86 It treats "the merciful" as a way to address God (for example in the Quran, in the Fatiha).



Do we have a separate word spelled Thegod in English dictionaries? Can you find it when you go to section T instead of G?
No, because the English usage of God is influenced by Latin, and Latin does not have any articles.


I disagree. If you have BOTH the words Allah and Ilah in your language and if you have rules determining their distinct usage, they cannot be the same word.
There is also a disctinct usage for "a white house" and "The White House" in English.

Καὶ εἰς ἕνα Κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ (definite article, but not the word OTHEOS". Tou Theou are separate. We have neither the word Otheos or Toutheou in Greek.
Did you actually read what I just said? To write "tou theou" separately is a CONVENTION which was established long after the actual texts were written. One could as well have DEFINED tu write "toutheou" without a space. And in the Arabic language, by convention there is never a space between article and following noun.


You have a choice.
1) Learn Arabic, then you will understand.
2) Learn humility and trust what the Arabic speaking parts of the Orthodox church have been doing for more than 1000 years.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 03:38:10 PM by Gorazd » Logged
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #115 on: August 27, 2010, 03:59:38 PM »

Theophilos, honestly, you sound like some sort of strange protestant.
Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #116 on: August 27, 2010, 04:16:56 PM »


Have you ever even seen an Arabic lexicon? Here is the entry for "arrahman" in the Arabic Wikipedia. http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%86 It treats "the merciful" as a way to address God (for example in the Quran, in the Fatiha).

Yes, that word is an Islamic term similar to YHWH. It is treated as a name of God.

No, because the English usage of God is influenced by Latin, and Latin does not have any articles.

Yet we say in English THE God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob...

There is also a disctinct usage for "a white house" and "The White House" in English.

These are not distinct words in the lexicon though.

Did you actually read what I just said? To write "tou theou" separately is a CONVENTION which was established long after the actual texts were written. One could as well have DEFINED tu write "toutheou" without a space. And in the Arabic language, by convention there is never a space between article and following noun.

Could and did the people living in the past write Otheos or Toutheou even if they did not use inflections? Allah is not the inflected form of the word Ilah.

You have a choice.
1) Learn Arabic, then you will understand.
2) Learn humility and trust what the Arabic speaking parts of the Orthodox church have been doing for more than 1000 years.

You have a choice:

1) Study Arabic to see how Allah is used differently than Ilah.
2) Teach Christian Arabs to take Allah out of their Church.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #117 on: August 27, 2010, 04:18:19 PM »

Theophilos, honestly, you sound like some sort of strange protestant.

And Christians who insist on using the word Allah in the Church sound like Muslims to me.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #118 on: August 27, 2010, 04:19:36 PM »

No, I have not seen that yet. The only thing I have been told over and over is that the word Allah means the God in Arabic, but no evidence for that speculation has shown up.  Roll Eyes

For a "former Muslim," you're certainly very ignorant of the most basic rules of Arabic.

Quote
Now pagan deities are extinct and not invoked except the false god of Meccan paganism.

So you're saying that Arab Christians are worshiping a pagan idol?

Quote
Your example is not relevant to our discussion because I have already proven that Allah does not mean God in Arabic. The equivalent of the English word "GOD" is "ILAH", not Allah.

What does "Al" mean in Arabic?

Quote

I have no facts to ignore, but only assumptions.

You have your own assumptions causing you to ignore the facts. Do you actually believe that Arab Christians are worshiping a pagan God?
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 04:20:17 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #119 on: August 27, 2010, 04:23:09 PM »

Theophilos, honestly, you sound like some sort of strange protestant.

And Christians who insist on using the word Allah in the Church sound like Muslims to me.  Wink

I remember hearing, after 9/11, about a Sikh taxi driver in NYC who was attacked by a bunch of thugs who assumed he was a Muslim "terrorist" because he wore a turban. Your attitude here isn't hurting anyone (aside from yourself) but it shows the same level of intelligence.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #120 on: August 27, 2010, 04:27:38 PM »


For a "former Muslim," you're certainly very ignorant of the most basic rules of Arabic.

So what? Not every Muslim is supposed to know or speak Arabic.  laugh

So you're saying that Arab Christians are worshiping a pagan idol?

You decide. The name is there. If I insisted on using the word Mithra while referring to the Trinity in Christian worship today, what would you think of me?

What does "Al" mean in Arabic?

Who said you can divide that word? Allah is one word while ilah another.

You have your own assumptions causing you to ignore the facts. Do you actually believe that Arab Christians are worshiping a pagan God?

I am afraid pre-Islamic history says so.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #121 on: August 27, 2010, 04:30:57 PM »


I remember hearing, after 9/11, about a Sikh taxi driver in NYC who was attacked by a bunch of thugs who assumed he was a Muslim "terrorist" because he wore a turban. Your attitude here isn't hurting anyone (aside from yourself) but it shows the same level of intelligence.

This is a false analogy.  Objecting to the use of the word Allah because of its negative meanings and implications is not equal to judging people only by their outward appearance or by what they wear. Roll Eyes
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,928



« Reply #122 on: August 27, 2010, 04:38:44 PM »

You have your own assumptions causing you to ignore the facts. Do you actually believe that Arab Christians are worshiping a pagan God?
I am afraid pre-Islamic history says so.

I'd come up for air soon, because you're going to start drowning in your own ideas.

If you really think you know better than all Arabic speaking Christians about how to handle this when you don't speak Arabic yourself, then you are being completely deceived by Satan. You're putting your own understanding at the top, when you've already admitted that you don't understand Arabic.

How can you shun your own Church?
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 04:39:43 PM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #123 on: August 27, 2010, 04:43:22 PM »


I'd come up for air soon, because you're going to start drowning in your own ideas.

If you really think you know better than all Arabic speaking Christians about how to handle this when you don't speak Arabic yourself, then you are being completely deceived by Satan. You're putting your own understanding at the top, when you've already admitted that you don't understand Arabic.

How can you shun your own Church?

I do not have to know or speak Arabic to read about pre-Islamic history and find out that Allah was the name assigned to the chief deity of the Meccan pantheon.

I hope the Orthodox Church does not have a dogma stipulating faith in Allah. If so, I shall have to abandon my Orthodox faith sooner or later.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,506



« Reply #124 on: August 27, 2010, 04:46:00 PM »

Who spoke Arabic first - Christians or Muslims? Who used the word "Allah" first - Christians or Muslims?

Since English-speaking Mormons appropriated the word "God", I guess we Christians will have to look for another. We wouldn't want to be accused of their heresy.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #125 on: August 27, 2010, 04:51:24 PM »

Who spoke Arabic first - Christians or Muslims? Who used the word "Allah" first - Christians or Muslims?


The question should be: How can Christians insist on using the word Allah if they know that it was the name of a pagan deity?

Let me ask you a question: Am I free to address the Holy Trinity as Mithra or Apollon?
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,506



« Reply #126 on: August 27, 2010, 05:03:00 PM »

Who spoke Arabic first - Christians or Muslims? Who used the word "Allah" first - Christians or Muslims?


The question should be: How can Christians insist on using the word Allah if they know that it was the name of a pagan deity?

Let me ask you a question: Am I free to address the Holy Trinity as Mithra or Apollon?
An excerpt from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php
Quote
O.E. god "supreme being, deity," from P.Gmc. *guthan (cf. Du. god, Ger. Gott, O.N. guð, Goth. guþ), from PIE *ghut- "that which is invoked" (cf. Skt. huta- "invoked," an epithet of Indra), from root *gheu(e)- "to call, invoke."

The speakers of Proto-Germanic and certainly Proto-Indo-European were not Christian. Will your next campaign be to outlaw the use of the word "God", now that you know it has pagan origin?

Dear friend, let me suggest as kindly as possible that you really need to deal with your hatred of your former faith and its adherents. I think that's the real issue here.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #127 on: August 27, 2010, 05:26:04 PM »


The speakers of Proto-Germanic and certainly Proto-Indo-European were not Christian. Will your next campaign be to outlaw the use of the word "God", now that you know it has pagan origin?

Do we use the word God in English as a personal name of our deity?  Roll Eyes

Dear friend, let me suggest as kindly as possible that you really need to deal with your hatred of your former faith and its adherents. I think that's the real issue here.

The question is why I should be a Christian if I insist on using the word Allah and why I should insist on using the word Allah if I am Christian. That's the real issue here.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #128 on: August 27, 2010, 06:17:52 PM »


The speakers of Proto-Germanic and certainly Proto-Indo-European were not Christian. Will your next campaign be to outlaw the use of the word "God", now that you know it has pagan origin?

Do we use the word God in English as a personal name of our deity?  Roll Eyes

Dear friend, let me suggest as kindly as possible that you really need to deal with your hatred of your former faith and its adherents. I think that's the real issue here.

The question is why I should be a Christian if I insist on using the word Allah and why I should insist on using the word Allah if I am Christian. That's the real issue here.

Your "Allah-less" church is any church outside the Orthodox Church.  Orthodox Christians love and praise Allah forever.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 06:18:26 PM by Orual » Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #129 on: August 27, 2010, 06:29:17 PM »


Your "Allah-less" church is any church outside the Orthodox Church.  Orthodox Christians love and praise Allah forever.

Hmmm interesting. Then I should suggest that you change the canon of your Allah-lover Church. Remove all the New Testament writings and endorse the Gospel of Barnabas. It is the only Gospel where you can find Allah and his mohammad.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #130 on: August 27, 2010, 08:40:55 PM »

So are you ok with the pagan term logos?
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #131 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »


Or let's just trust that our God-bearing Fathers had a better idea of how to render things than we do.

and like our God-bearing Fathers, let's avoid invoking the names of false and pagan deities.  Wink

Allah is the name of the Christian God for Arabic Christians, a name which they used before the introduction of the worship of the God of Islam.

Case closed.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #132 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »

I hope the Orthodox tradition does not stipulate that we pray to Allah in our liturgies. Wink

Yes, it does.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #133 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »

No, I have not seen that yet. The only thing I have been told over and over is that the word Allah means the God in Arabic, but no evidence for that speculation has shown up.  Roll Eyes

That Arabic Christians even before the 7th century used it to refer to the Christian God isn't "evidence"?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #134 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »

Your example is not relevant to our discussion because I have already proven that Allah does not mean God in Arabic. The equivalent of the English word "GOD" is "ILAH", not Allah.  Wink

Once again: The Nicene creed reads "true God from true God" in English and "ILAH haq min ILAH haq" in Arabic. I cannot see the word Allah in that line. Why is that?  Roll Eyes

It would be redundant. "Allah" is the combination of "Al", meaning the (one), and "Ilah", meaning god/deity. Thus, Allah means the God, an emphasis that any exclusive form of Judaism, Christianity, or Islam would use.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #135 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »


Both Christians and Muslims use an Arabic word, but mean different things. What is so difficult to unterstand about it? When CHP says "freedom" (özgürlük), they mean the freedom to be without headscarf. When AKP says freedom, they mean the freedom to be WITH headscarf. Same word, opposite meaning.

Can I follow this example and pray to Apollon, having in mind the true God of Christianity? Or would it be wrong for me to pray to Apollon no matter how I strive to prove that MY Apollon is different from THE Apollon of the Greek mythology?  Roll Eyes

You are again overlooking the fact that Arabic Christianity preceded Islam.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #136 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »

The question should be: How can Christians insist on using the word Allah if they know that it was the name of a pagan deity?

Some Arabic pagan group referring to their god as "the god" sounds potentially generic as well.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #137 on: August 27, 2010, 10:46:15 PM »

So are you ok with the pagan term logos?

Platonist for that matter.

Nice one.  Wink
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #138 on: August 28, 2010, 06:48:26 AM »

So are you ok with the pagan term logos?

Was Logos the name of a pagan deity? Do some non-Christians still stick to their deity of pagan origin named Logos today and insist on using his name in their worship?  Roll Eyes
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #139 on: August 28, 2010, 06:50:34 AM »


You are again overlooking the fact that Arabic Christianity preceded Islam.

You are again overlooking the fact that Islam adopted the name Allah from Meccan pagans, not from Christians.

Allah = Hubal

Here is a nice article that proves the followers of Allah in manifest error:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/tt1/tt5.html
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #140 on: August 28, 2010, 06:57:20 AM »


Allah is the name of the Christian God for Arabic Christians, a name which they used before the introduction of the worship of the God of Islam.

Case closed.

Cannot be true in the light of the divine manifestation in Exodus 3:15.

"I AM THAT I AM. This is my NAME from generation to generation".

No Christian has the right to replace the true name of the Biblical God with a name ascribed also to the chief god of Meccan paganism.

Case closed.  angel

Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #141 on: August 28, 2010, 06:59:14 AM »

Don't you see the difference between proper nouns ad common nouns?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #142 on: August 28, 2010, 07:00:46 AM »

Was Logos the name of a pagan deity? Do some non-Christians still stick to their deity of pagan origin named Logos today and insist on using his name in their worship?  Roll Eyes

Yah/Yahweh was used as a personal name for pagan deities by Canaanites. Who cares?

You were baptised bism il-Ab, wal-Ibn, war-Ru7il Qudus, not bism Illah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim. Relax.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #143 on: August 28, 2010, 07:06:25 AM »


Yah/Yahweh was used as a personal name for pagan deities by Canaanites. Who cares?

Evidence for the claim that some Caananites had the name Yahweh for their pagan deities please.

You were baptised bism il-Ab, wal-Ibn, war-Ru7il Qudus, not bism Illah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim. Relax.

But the word Allah was used throughout the ritual, even in the Nicene Creed! I do not believe that Jesus is the Son of Allah, but of Yahweh! Allah had many sons and daughters, Allat being one of them! I want to be a Christian instead of a pagan of Mecca!
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #144 on: August 28, 2010, 07:07:20 AM »

Don't you see the difference between proper nouns ad common nouns?

Allah is treated as a proper noun as a rival for Yahweh.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #145 on: August 28, 2010, 07:17:53 AM »

Don't you see the difference between proper nouns ad common nouns?

Allah is treated as a proper noun as a rival for Yahweh.

Well, no.

"Allah" is a common noun.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,506



« Reply #146 on: August 28, 2010, 07:26:06 AM »


You are again overlooking the fact that Arabic Christianity preceded Islam.

You are again overlooking the fact that Islam adopted the name Allah from Meccan pagans, not from Christians.

Allah = Hubal

Here is a nice article that proves the followers of Allah in manifest error:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/tt1/tt5.html
The very site that you point towards says this:
Quote
We are well aware that the name Allah is used by Arab speaking Christians for the God of the Bible. In fact, the root from which the name is derived, ilah, stems from the ancient Semitic languages, corresponding to the Mesopotamian IL, as well as the Hebrew-Aramaic EL, as in Ishma-el, Immanu-el, Isra-el. These terms were often used to refer to any deity worshiped as a high god, especially the chief deity amongst a pantheon of lesser gods. As such, the Holy Bible uses the term as just one of the many titles for Yahweh, the only true God.

Yet the problem arises from the fact that Muslims insist that Allah is not a title, but the personal name of the God of Islam. This becomes problematic since according to the Holy Bible the name of the God of Abraham is Yahweh/Jehovah, not Allah:

    God spoke further to Moses and said to him, "I am Yahweh (YHVH) and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty; BUT BY MY NAME, YAHWEH, I did not make myself known to them." Exodus 6:2-3

Therefore, Christians can use Allah as a title but not as the personal name for the God of the Bible.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/god.htm

Do a search to find out how many times "O God..." is found in the Bible, and remember that "God" is not a personal name.

The site that you pointed out to us presents the word "Allah" from a Muslim perspective, not a Christian one, and quite rightly points out that there is a difference.

If you insist that an Arabic speaking Christian cannot/must not say "I am a follower of Allah" (in a Christian - NOT Muslim - context), then you must use the same reasoning to forbid me, as an English speaking Christian to say, "I am a follower of God". The words "Allah" and "God" are equally pagan etymologically.

If you insist that an Arabic speaking Christian cannon/must not say "I am a follower of Allah" because that's what the Muslims say, then you must use the same reasoning to forbid me, as an English speaking Christian to say, "I am a follower of God" because that's what the Mormons say.

Please, dear friend, try to consider why you are so insistent on this matter in spite of all the evidence that has been presented.
Logged
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #147 on: August 28, 2010, 12:37:32 PM »


You are again overlooking the fact that Arabic Christianity preceded Islam.

You are again overlooking the fact that Islam adopted the name Allah from Meccan pagans, not from Christians.

Allah = Hubal

The word "Allah" was already used by Christians before Islam, also in the Syriac language. Or how the heck would Muhammad have gotten the idea that his tribe God is the same as the God of Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus etc. ,if hje had not heard the word "Allah" amongst Christians when traveling to Syria?


Theophilos - do you trust the Orthodox church? Or do you think your own brain knows better? Pride is a great sin, so de be careful.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #148 on: August 28, 2010, 03:24:28 PM »


Please, dear friend, try to consider why you are so insistent on this matter in spite of all the evidence that has been presented.

I insist that we not use the word Allah because now, after Islam, it is an Islamic term pertaining to Mohammad's false god adopted from Meccan paganism.

Do you know what some wild beasts who martyred three Christian missionaries by cutting their throats and stabbing them tens of times in a bookstore in Eastern Turkey said while committing their atrocity? They yelled: "There is no God, but allah". I respond: "To hell with them and their non-existing allah".
« Last Edit: August 28, 2010, 03:37:48 PM by Theophilos78 » Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #149 on: August 28, 2010, 03:30:54 PM »


The word "Allah" was already used by Christians before Islam, also in the Syriac language. Or how the heck would Muhammad have gotten the idea that his tribe God is the same as the God of Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus etc. ,if hje had not heard the word "Allah" amongst Christians when traveling to Syria?

Mohammad got that idea from Satan, who gave him his verses in disguise of an angel. We do not worship the same God as Muslims. Muslims do not believe in God, but allah. Their creed reads: "There is no God, but only allah".

Theophilos - do you trust the Orthodox church? Or do you think your own brain knows better? Pride is a great sin, so de be careful.

I trust the Orthodox Church as I trust the Lord, who said: "Do not be like the Gentiles when you pray". (Muslims are today's Gentiles).
I trust the tradition of the Orthodox Church. In Didache it is written that we should not fast on the same day as Jews. How can we be allowed to pray in the same way as Muslims if we are not even allowed to fast on the same day as Jews?
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #150 on: August 28, 2010, 03:45:41 PM »

Their creed reads: "There is no God, but only allah".

"There is no God apart from Allah" - it shows their monotheism.

BTW in Maltan (9x% RC) "Alla" means "God" too.

Are you aware that you are propably the first person to be irritating by it?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #151 on: August 28, 2010, 03:48:15 PM »

I am having a really hard time following your reasoning. All I can say is that Jesus is the personal name of the 2nd person of the Triune God. However, that personal name was used by gnostics to write satanic stories so since we do not believe in the same "god" as the Gnostics should we refuse to use the name of Jesus, the Christ?

Also, on a separate note I can not state empirically that there isn't anyone beliving in a different concept of logos that corresponds to it's pre-christian meaning. There have been many times when people confused philosophy with theology or in other words made philioshy their religion.
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #152 on: August 28, 2010, 03:55:05 PM »


"There is no God apart from Allah" - it shows their monotheism.

No. Muslims do not believe that Allah is a "god".

BTW in Maltan (9x% RC) "Alla" means "God" too.

Because of the Islamic invasion of Malta. It shows the influence of Islamic culture (language).

Are you aware that you are propably the first person to be irritating by it?

I do not think so. I know a few people who are allergic to Allah. A friend of mine was going to convert to Orthodoxy and receive baptism, but he changed his mind and dediced to be an unchurched Orthodox when he found out that Allah is prayed in the Orthodox Churches of Arabic population.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #153 on: August 28, 2010, 03:58:36 PM »

I am having a really hard time following your reasoning. All I can say is that Jesus is the personal name of the 2nd person of the Triune God. However, that personal name was used by gnostics to write satanic stories so since we do not believe in the same "god" as the Gnostics should we refuse to use the name of Jesus, the Christ?


We have the name Jesus in our Sacred Scripture, but Allah was not originally in the Bible. It was inserted later through translation.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #154 on: August 28, 2010, 04:05:21 PM »

No, there wasn't "Jesus" in Scriptures. There was "Ιησούς". "Jesus" was inserted later through translation by heretic Anglicans and it's the name of their false God.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2010, 04:05:50 PM by mike » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #155 on: August 28, 2010, 04:38:15 PM »

No, there wasn't "Jesus" in Scriptures. There was "Ιησούς". "Jesus" was inserted later through translation by heretic Anglicans and it's the name of their false God.

Jesus = Ιησούς. they are the same name. Ιησούς was tranlated into Greek from aramaic. Please do not associate the English speaking world with heretics. Jesus would have been called Yeshua in aramaic however the Evangelists translated it into the common language which was a language of pagan gentiles.
Logged
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #156 on: August 28, 2010, 04:49:23 PM »

No, there wasn't "Jesus" in Scriptures. There was "Ιησούς". "Jesus" was inserted later through translation by heretic Anglicans and it's the name of their false God.

Also, I think you missed my point that some of the  so called Gnostic "gospels", which were not written in english accuse Ιησούς/Jesus/Yeshua/Joshua (pick one) of being an evil Magician that murdered people for fun. While others are content with merely perverting His teachings. So if Theophilios's point is that Arab Christians should not use Allah because it was appropriated by Muslims then it should hold true for this example as well.  

http://www.gnosis.org/library/inftoma.htm
« Last Edit: August 28, 2010, 05:04:32 PM by ICXCNIKA » Logged
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,506



« Reply #157 on: August 28, 2010, 05:38:06 PM »


Please, dear friend, try to consider why you are so insistent on this matter in spite of all the evidence that has been presented.

I insist that we not use the word Allah because now, after Islam, it is an Islamic term pertaining to Mohammad's false god adopted from Meccan paganism.

Do you know what some wild beasts who martyred three Christian missionaries by cutting their throats and stabbing them tens of times in a bookstore in Eastern Turkey said while committing their atrocity? They yelled: "There is no God, but allah". I respond: "To hell with them and their non-existing allah".
There are so many things wrong in this statement that it would be easy for me to rebut. But you aren't listening. This is my third request to you that you seek resolution of your intense hatred of your former faith and its adherents.

Be assured of my humble prayers for you.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #158 on: August 28, 2010, 06:15:49 PM »

Was Logos the name of a pagan deity?

Actually, the Logos was part of the Platonist Triad.

Do some non-Christians still stick to their deity of pagan origin named Logos today and insist on using his name in their worship?  Roll Eyes

Christians are still insisting on worshiping the Logos, the concept of the Logos having originated in Platonism, yes.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #159 on: August 28, 2010, 06:15:49 PM »


You are again overlooking the fact that Arabic Christianity preceded Islam.

You are again overlooking the fact that Islam adopted the name Allah from Meccan pagans, not from Christians.

No, I'm not. That is a total red herring. I was pointing out that Arabic Christians could not have possibly gotten "Allah" from Islam, because when they first started using the word Islam did not even exist.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #160 on: August 28, 2010, 06:15:49 PM »


Allah is the name of the Christian God for Arabic Christians, a name which they used before the introduction of the worship of the God of Islam.

Case closed.

Cannot be true in the light of the divine manifestation in Exodus 3:15.

"I AM THAT I AM. This is my NAME from generation to generation".

No Christian has the right to replace the true name of the Biblical God with a name ascribed also to the chief god of Meccan paganism.

Case closed.  angel



Cannot be true?

Well, it is true.

There is historical evidence to show this.

Arabic Christians were calling God "Allah" before Islam even existed.

If you're not willing to believe that, then that is to your own detriment.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
samkim
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 735



« Reply #161 on: August 28, 2010, 06:34:40 PM »

Do you call the deity you worship "God?" If so, you could be worshipping any number of Scandinavian deities, by your logic.

Even YHWH in the Old Testament was referred to by the pagan title of Baal (because it simply means Lord). And Baal was the personal name of a pagan god.

« Last Edit: August 28, 2010, 06:36:40 PM by samkim » Logged

주 예수 그리스도 하느님의 아들이시여 저 이 죄인을 불쌍히 여기소서.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #162 on: August 28, 2010, 06:39:46 PM »

Do you call the deity you worship "God?" If so, you could be worshipping any number of Scandinavian deities, by your logic.


“I am that I am. This is my name forever, and this is my memorial from generation to generation." (Exodus 3:14-15)

Read about Allah and the moon god here:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/moonotheism.htm
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #163 on: August 28, 2010, 06:41:40 PM »


Actually, the Logos was part of the Platonist Triad.

Logos means WORD in Greek. It is a concept rather than a personal name.

Christians are still insisting on worshiping the Logos, the concept of the Logos having originated in Platonism, yes.

Logos is not a personal name of our deity.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #164 on: August 28, 2010, 06:43:22 PM »


No, I'm not. That is a total red herring. I was pointing out that Arabic Christians could not have possibly gotten "Allah" from Islam, because when they first started using the word Islam did not even exist.

Where did Muslims get the name Allah from then? Allah was the moon god of the Meccan paganism. It is so simple.

Suggested reading:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/moonotheism.htm
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #165 on: August 28, 2010, 06:45:01 PM »


Cannot be true?

Well, it is true.

There is historical evidence to show this.

Arabic Christians were calling God "Allah" before Islam even existed.

If you're not willing to believe that, then that is to your own detriment.

Detriment? What kind of harm could my disbelief in the moon god cause?  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #166 on: August 28, 2010, 06:46:39 PM »

There are so many things wrong in this statement that it would be easy for me to rebut. But you aren't listening. This is my third request to you that you seek resolution of your intense hatred of your former faith and its adherents.

Be assured of my humble prayers for you.

Thanks for your prayers, but I am fine and happy this way. I can even impose maledictions on Muslims with the help of prayers accompanied by simple rituals.  Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #167 on: August 28, 2010, 07:32:13 PM »


Where did Muslims get the name Allah from then?

Where did Muhammad get the idea from that "Allah" was the God of Adam, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus?

Simply because Christians and Jews already used "Allah" to refer to their God.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #168 on: August 29, 2010, 05:23:15 AM »

If our Brother Theophilos 78 ,Doesn't Like The word Allah and feels uncomforable about it  ,it's his right not to use it......We serbs don't use the word ,neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....So many orthodox to chose from that don't use it.im sure there others...Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 05:25:47 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #169 on: August 29, 2010, 05:44:33 AM »

If he wanted to go to the Church naked would "you Serbs" allow him to do so also?
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 05:44:45 AM by mike » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #170 on: August 29, 2010, 05:46:25 AM »

If he wanted to go to the Church naked would "you Serbs" allow him to do so also?


If He wants to Be Naked for His Baptisim that's his choice..... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #171 on: August 29, 2010, 05:52:25 AM »


Cursed be the priest who dares to baptize again a man who has been cleansed by the Baptism of the Church.  Let him be deposed and cast out of the altar!

Canon....?

Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #172 on: August 29, 2010, 05:58:50 AM »

Creed?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #173 on: August 29, 2010, 05:59:05 AM »


Cursed be the priest who dares to baptize again a man who has been cleansed by the Baptism of the Church.  Let him be deposed and cast out of the altar!

Canon....?



Oce Blagoslovi I oprocti moju Gresku......Amin   For Leading someone astray..... angel
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 06:00:47 AM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #174 on: August 29, 2010, 06:07:37 AM »

If our Brother Theophilos 78 ,Doesn't Like The word Allah and feels uncomforable about it  ,it's his right not to use it......We serbs don't use the word ,neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....So many orthodox to chose from that don't use it.im sure there others...Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin
Pozdrav .......
Brate Theophilos 78 Please don't Pay attention to my ramblings....... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #175 on: August 29, 2010, 06:12:37 AM »


Cursed be the priest who dares to baptize again a man who has been cleansed by the Baptism of the Church.  Let him be deposed and cast out of the altar!

Canon....?



Oce Blagoslovi I oprocti moju Gresku......Amin   For Leading someone astray..... angel

Stashko, oprosti!  That wasn't a jab at you.  I have been thinking of saying that for a while, before your message came on the list.  I think that Fr George said the same thing earlier but in a softer way -without the fireworks which I used - and people did not seem  to pay much attention to what he said.

But the repetition of the Church's Baptism does indeed call for the deposition of the priest or bishop who is guilty of performing it.

Apostolic Canon 47:

Let a bishop or presbyter who shall baptize again one who has rightly received baptism, or who shall not baptize one who has been polluted by the ungodly, be deposed, as despising the cross and death of the Lord, and not making a distinction between the true priests and the false.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 06:16:14 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #176 on: August 29, 2010, 06:25:14 AM »


Cursed be the priest who dares to baptize again a man who has been cleansed by the Baptism of the Church.  Let him be deposed and cast out of the altar!

Canon....?



Oce Blagoslovi I oprocti moju Gresku......Amin   For Leading someone astray..... angel

Stashko, oprosti!  That wasn't a jab at you.  I have been thinking of saying that for a while, before your message came on the list.  I think that Fr George said the same thing earlier but in a softer way -without the fireworks which I used - and people did not seem  to pay much attention to what he said.

But the repetition of the Church's Baptism does indeed call for the deposition of the priest or bishop who is guilty of performing it.

Apostolic Canon 47:

Let a bishop or presbyter who shall baptize again one who has rightly received baptism, or who shall not baptize one who has been polluted by the ungodly, be deposed, as despising the cross and death of the Lord, and not making a distinction between the true priests and the false.

Fr..
Im not upset feel free anytime to correct.... Correction is good thats how one learns..... Grin
Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #177 on: August 29, 2010, 06:51:15 AM »


Where did Muhammad get the idea from that "Allah" was the God of Adam, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus?


From the same place where he got the idea that Ishmael lived in Mecca and built the Cube with Abraham.  Roll Eyes

Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #178 on: August 29, 2010, 06:52:36 AM »

If our Brother Theophilos 78 ,Doesn't Like The word Allah and feels uncomforable about it  ,it's his right not to use it......We serbs don't use the word ,neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....So many orthodox to chose from that don't use it.im sure there others...Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin
Pozdrav .......
Brate Theophilos 78 Please don't Pay attention to my ramblings....... Grin

Brate,
Thanks for the suggestion though! It made my day.  Grin

Pozdrav
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #179 on: August 29, 2010, 07:52:37 AM »

If our Brother Theophilos 78 ,Doesn't Like The word Allah and feels uncomforable about it  ,it's his right not to use it......We serbs don't use the word ,neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....So many orthodox to chose from that don't use it.im sure there others...Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin
In other words, the ones who don't use the word "Allah" are the ones who don't speak Arabic. Roll Eyes
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #180 on: August 29, 2010, 08:11:41 AM »

If our Brother Theophilos 78 ,Doesn't Like The word Allah and feels uncomforable about it  ,it's his right not to use it......We serbs don't use the word ,neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....So many orthodox to chose from that don't use it.im sure there others...Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin
In other words, the ones who don't use the word "Allah" are the ones who don't speak Arabic. Roll Eyes

I sometimes pray in Arabic, but avoid using the word Allah. Wink
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #181 on: August 29, 2010, 08:41:45 AM »

Pray that God won't avoid you because of reciprocity.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #182 on: August 29, 2010, 09:15:59 AM »

Pray that God won't avoid you because of reciprocity.

If that is the case, no prayer will be accepted because of the paradox.  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #183 on: August 29, 2010, 12:21:56 PM »

Ahh, thrust a stereotype into the conversation to try and win points.  Old trick, old result - no dice.  I've seen fonts designed by parishioners, crafted with their own hands; no one said anything about having gold, silver, platinum, marble, etc. fonts.
Again, parishioners with the time, skill, and resources to do this are not in every parish. 

That is true, and no potential member of the Body of Christ should be penalized for that.

I agree. He should not be penalized with an uncanonical baptism by pouring.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #184 on: August 29, 2010, 06:15:50 PM »

Logos means WORD in Greek. It is a concept rather than a personal name.

Not just a concept. The Logos has been understood to be hypostatic, meaning a substantial being, both in Platonism and in Christianity.

Logos is not a personal name of our deity.

Nor is "Son". But nonetheless it is clear that both refer to the divine hypostasis of the Lord Jesus Christ, and also originally referred to a member of the Platonist Triad.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #185 on: August 29, 2010, 06:15:50 PM »


No, I'm not. That is a total red herring. I was pointing out that Arabic Christians could not have possibly gotten "Allah" from Islam, because when they first started using the word Islam did not even exist.

Where did Muslims get the name Allah from then? Allah was the moon god of the Meccan paganism. It is so simple.

Suggested reading:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/moonotheism.htm

Meccan Pagans first used the term "Allah", meaning "the god", to refer to their god. Muslims also used the term to refer to their own god, and at that in a more monotheistic sense. Arabic Christians used the term "Allah" in the same sense to refer to "the god". Just because Muslims continued to use the same term to refer to god as the Pagan religion they came out of doesn't necessarily mean that the deity they were worshiping was the same as the Pagans.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #186 on: August 29, 2010, 06:15:50 PM »


Cannot be true?

Well, it is true.

There is historical evidence to show this.

Arabic Christians were calling God "Allah" before Islam even existed.

If you're not willing to believe that, then that is to your own detriment.

Detriment? What kind of harm could my disbelief in the moon god cause?  Grin

You're not being rational. Just because all three groups used the same term to refer to their own deities doesn't necessarily mean that they were worshiping the same deity.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #187 on: August 29, 2010, 06:15:50 PM »

it's his right not to use it

Given that it has lead him to deny his baptism in a canonical jurisdiction of your communion, it's significantly more problematic than you are giving it credit.

We serbs don't use the word neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....

No duh you don't. None of you use Arabic. "Allah" is an Arabic word.

Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin

I've never heard of one canonical jurisdiction of a communion rebaptizing a person who was baptized in another canonical jurisdiction of the same communion. That just sounds absurd.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #188 on: August 29, 2010, 07:11:47 PM »


Not just a concept. The Logos has been understood to be hypostatic, meaning a substantial being, both in Platonism and in Christianity.

Again, a "substantial being", but not a personal name.

Nor is "Son". But nonetheless it is clear that both refer to the divine hypostasis of the Lord Jesus Christ, and also originally referred to a member of the Platonist Triad.

This is red herring. We are not discussing the meaning of the words Logos or Son here, but the usage of Allah as a personal name.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #189 on: August 29, 2010, 07:19:52 PM »


Meccan Pagans first used the term "Allah", meaning "the god", to refer to their god.

Your evidence?

Meccan pagans, like all the other pagans, assigned a proper noun to each of their deities so as to distinguish one god from another. It is not reasonable to say that polytheists called one of their many gods "the God".

What about the word Allat? What did it mean? The goddess? NO! It was a proper noun given to one of the female gods/idols of the Meccan pantheon.

Muslims also used the term to refer to their own god, and at that in a more monotheistic sense. Arabic Christians used the term "Allah" in the same sense to refer to "the god". Just because Muslims continued to use the same term to refer to god as the Pagan religion they came out of doesn't necessarily mean that the deity they were worshiping was the same as the Pagans.

Muslims use the term as the foremost personal name of their god. The Qur'an treats the word Allah as a personal name too. Why is that? Could it be because Mohammad knew he adopted the word from Meccan pagans, he himself being one of them?
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,048


"My god is greater."


« Reply #190 on: August 29, 2010, 07:20:46 PM »

Friends, what we have here is a case of "invincible ignorance." Introducing facts or logical arguments is a waste of time here; Theophilos will just have to overcome his hang-ups over Islam by himself. I'll just say, Theophilos, that if you honestly believe that the Arabs in the Orthodox church pray to a pagan moon god, then the Orthodox Church is in communion with a bunch of pagans and we are therefore a pagan church. 
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 07:22:00 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #191 on: August 29, 2010, 07:21:49 PM »

You're not being rational. Just because all three groups used the same term to refer to their own deities doesn't necessarily mean that they were worshiping the same deity.

Here comes a question for you:

Can I use the word Amon-Ra while referring to the Holy Trinity in the Church? Is this possible? Please answer my question.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #192 on: August 29, 2010, 07:23:24 PM »

Friends, what we have here is a case of "invincible ignorance." Introducing facts or logical arguments is a waste of time here; Theophilos will just have to overcome his hang-ups over Islam by himself. I'll just say, Theophilos, that if you honestly believe that the Arabs in the Orthodox church pray to a pagan moon god, then the Orthodox Church is in communion with a bunch of pagans and we are therefore a pagan church. 

What an academic concession of defeat!  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #193 on: August 29, 2010, 07:38:24 PM »

Have you expressed your views to your priest? I think he will tell you that you will have to overcome this stumbling block. I would not be surprised if he took corrective action if you continue in your folly.
Logged
stashko
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: ИСТОЧНИ ПРАВОСЛАВНИ СРБИН
Jurisdiction: Non Ecumenist Free Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 4,998


Wonderworking Sitka Icon


« Reply #194 on: August 29, 2010, 07:48:07 PM »

it's his right not to use it

Given that it has lead him to deny his baptism in a canonical jurisdiction of your communion, it's significantly more problematic than you are giving it credit.

We serbs don't use the word neither do the russian,romainians,bulgarians,polish, macidonians,belo russians....georgians....

No duh you don't. None of you use Arabic. "Allah" is an Arabic word.

Some Of them May even rebaptize you ...try the serbs we don't mind  washing  the allah off in Holy Baptisim....  Grin

I've never heard of one canonical jurisdiction of a communion rebaptizing a person who was baptized in another canonical jurisdiction of the same communion. That just sounds absurd.

It's to Late To Bring Anything Up ,I repented asked  Fr. Ambrose For Absolution In Forgivness,,,,For Leading In Ignorance some One Astray....Be a little Humble Yourself it works wonders.... Instead of trying to get the last  word in all the time....... Grin
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 08:10:42 PM by stashko » Logged

ГОСПОДЕ ГОСПОДЕ ,ПОГЛЕДАЈ СА НЕБА ,ДОЂИ И ПОСЕТИ ТВОЈ ВИНОГРАД ТВОЈА ДЕСНИЦА ПОСАДИЛА АМИН АМИН.
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #195 on: August 29, 2010, 08:15:16 PM »


Not just a concept. The Logos has been understood to be hypostatic, meaning a substantial being, both in Platonism and in Christianity.

Again, a "substantial being", but not a personal name.

Nor is "Son". But nonetheless it is clear that both refer to the divine hypostasis of the Lord Jesus Christ, and also originally referred to a member of the Platonist Triad.

This is red herring. We are not discussing the meaning of the words Logos or Son here, but the usage of Allah as a personal name.

So the fact that God the Son is identified with a Platonist concept, even one that was understood as a substantial being, doesn't bother you at all?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #196 on: August 29, 2010, 08:15:16 PM »


Meccan Pagans first used the term "Allah", meaning "the god", to refer to their god.

Your evidence?

Meccan pagans, like all the other pagans, assigned a proper noun to each of their deities so as to distinguish one god from another. It is not reasonable to say that polytheists called one of their many gods "the God".

What about the word Allat? What did it mean? The goddess? NO! It was a proper noun given to one of the female gods/idols of the Meccan pantheon.

Muslims also used the term to refer to their own god, and at that in a more monotheistic sense. Arabic Christians used the term "Allah" in the same sense to refer to "the god". Just because Muslims continued to use the same term to refer to god as the Pagan religion they came out of doesn't necessarily mean that the deity they were worshiping was the same as the Pagans.

Muslims use the term as the foremost personal name of their god. The Qur'an treats the word Allah as a personal name too. Why is that? Could it be because Mohammad knew he adopted the word from Meccan pagans, he himself being one of them?

1. I don't personally care all that much about whether Islam is a carryover from Paganism. I don't think that's entirely relevant to Arabic Christianity. Perhaps Muhammad could have founded a new religion on the basis of the worship of a Pagan deity. However, I don't see how Christians could possibly have done that. How and why would converts to Christianity, a religion that had already clearly distinguished itself from Paganism, use the name of a Pagan deity to worship a god that is already expected to not be Pagan? That just doesn't make sense.

2. The personal name of the Arabic moon-god, who was the primary deity of Mecca, appears to actually have been Hubal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubal  Undecided
So no, you're acting as if "Allah" was the name that the Arabs used to refer to their moon-god. In fact it was Hubal. Allah is the name only of the deity typically ascribed to Islam. Any association of the two is based merely off of one archaeological site ascribed to Allah in which this one speculates it was actually Hubal.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #197 on: August 29, 2010, 08:15:16 PM »

You're not being rational. Just because all three groups used the same term to refer to their own deities doesn't necessarily mean that they were worshiping the same deity.

Here comes a question for you:

Can I use the word Amon-Ra while referring to the Holy Trinity in the Church? Is this possible? Please answer my question.

No.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #198 on: August 29, 2010, 08:16:00 PM »

What makes the idea even more preposterous is the fact that there was an idol to Hubal in the Kabba and Muhammad, the man you claim worshiped Hubal, actually personally destroyed the idol of Hubal.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #199 on: August 29, 2010, 10:16:41 PM »

"I insist that we not use the word Allah because now, after Islam, it is an Islamic term pertaining to Mohammad's false god adopted from Meccan paganism."

I have some very unfortunate news for you.  I just founded a new religion, we would be considered pagans by you.  We incorporate Christ, God, Jesus, Trinity, and all other Christian terms as personal names for God.  I suppose you should be coming up with a new word all your own now, huh?  By the way, we also have baptism, a liturgy, saints, and whatever other Christian things you can think of - I suppose you should drop them to.  We also revere Mary and the Apostles and St. John the Forerunner, I suppose you should discard them as well.

And to whomever it was that said God speaks German...I feel so very sorry for you.  God clearly speaks only English - how else did he tell King Henry VIII to make himself the Pope? j/k



Gratuitous political comment removed from post.  Please save your political commentary for the Politics board.  If you don't yet have access to the Politics board, please send Fr. Chris a private message to request this access.  Thank you.  -PtA
« Last Edit: August 29, 2010, 10:36:25 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #200 on: August 30, 2010, 02:52:09 AM »

Have you expressed your views to your priest? I think he will tell you that you will have to overcome this stumbling block. I would not be surprised if he took corrective action if you continue in your folly.

If he really attempted to "correct" me because of my supposed "folly", I would consider being an unchurched Christian.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #201 on: August 30, 2010, 02:54:29 AM »


2. The personal name of the Arabic moon-god, who was the primary deity of Mecca, appears to actually have been Hubal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubal  Undecided
So no, you're acting as if "Allah" was the name that the Arabs used to refer to their moon-god. In fact it was Hubal. Allah is the name only of the deity typically ascribed to Islam. Any association of the two is based merely off of one archaeological site ascribed to Allah in which this one speculates it was actually Hubal.

Hubal was the equivalent of Baal in Mecca. Allah, on the other hand, was the name of another deity Meccan pagans worshipped.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #202 on: August 30, 2010, 03:00:20 AM »

What makes the idea even more preposterous is the fact that there was an idol to Hubal in the Kabba and Muhammad, the man you claim worshiped Hubal, actually personally destroyed the idol of Hubal.

Mohammad did worship Hubal before making himself a prophet. He was born to pagan parents in a pagan tribe. He eventually destroyed all the idols, but kept the Cube and his Allah.  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline