OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 06:31:49 PM *
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 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Make God's path straight by being born again  (Read 57753 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 24, 2010, 01:14:14 AM »



Mat 16:16 doesn't teach baptism is necessary for salvation, it only says it happens among those who really believe. In Mark's day, any Jew getting baptised was forsaking all he owned, to follow Christ. So baptism is being use "adjectivally" to modify belief, it indicates true belief is required, the kind of belief that will follow Christ wherever He goes.


The bolded portion itself is incorrect, baptism was a common Judaic ritual of purification and a sign on repentance.  That belief is required to go along with the baptism of a new convert is something our Church teaches as well.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #46 on: August 24, 2010, 01:21:15 AM »

LOL ... when someone replies to you WITH Scripture verses you either ignore them or assert they have misinterpreted them.  

When someone replies to you WITHOUT Scripture verses you complain that they have nothing to back up their statements.

Is the heat getting to you, Alfred? Cheesy

Incorrect, correctly interpret scripture and I will be pleased, I promise.

30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”
31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:


      “ He was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
      And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
       So He opened not His mouth.
       33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
      And who will declare His generation?
      For His life is taken from the earth.”

34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, “I ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Acts 8:30-38

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)



Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #47 on: August 24, 2010, 01:21:32 AM »

No, I'm afraid to look at the garden right now - it's in a sorry state with temps over 100!
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,656


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #48 on: August 24, 2010, 01:22:41 AM »

LOL ... when someone replies to you WITH Scripture verses you either ignore them or assert they have misinterpreted them.  

When someone replies to you WITHOUT Scripture verses you complain that they have nothing to back up their statements.

Is the heat getting to you, Alfred? Cheesy

Nope---correctly interpret scripture and I will be pleased, I promise.
So what's your measure for the correct interpretation of Scripture?
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #49 on: August 24, 2010, 01:25:14 AM »

Alfred, just give up and try proselytizing elsewhere.  You will never convince me of anything.

Logged
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 24, 2010, 01:27:57 AM »

LOL ... when someone replies to you WITH Scripture verses you either ignore them or assert they have misinterpreted them.  

When someone replies to you WITHOUT Scripture verses you complain that they have nothing to back up their statements.

Is the heat getting to you, Alfred? Cheesy

Incorrect, correctly interpret scripture and I will be pleased, I promise.

30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”
31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:


      “ He was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
      And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
       So He opened not His mouth.
       33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
      And who will declare His generation?
      For His life is taken from the earth.”

34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, “I ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Acts 8:30-38

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)





And the Thief gained paradise without baptism.  But notice the Gentiles were baptized.  God doesn't fit in our boxes, but when He tells you to get in the box it's generally a good idea to listen.
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #51 on: August 24, 2010, 02:11:04 AM »

LOL ... when someone replies to you WITH Scripture verses you either ignore them or assert they have misinterpreted them.  

When someone replies to you WITHOUT Scripture verses you complain that they have nothing to back up their statements.

Is the heat getting to you, Alfred? Cheesy

Incorrect, correctly interpret scripture and I will be pleased, I promise.

30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”
31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:


      “ He was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
      And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
       So He opened not His mouth.
       33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
      And who will declare His generation?
      For His life is taken from the earth.”

34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, “I ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Acts 8:30-38

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

I just came across a story on St. Alexander Hotovitsky the Neo-Martyr in a contemporary article on Patriarch St. Tikhon:
Quote
The anecdote I heard in Moscow about Father Hotovitsky, of the Church of the Savior is indicative of the sort of priests here mentioned. There is probably no more remarkable preacher in Russia than Father Hotovitsky. His sermons are very modern both in their theology and in their practical application. He was drawn into a discussion with Lunacharsky, Commissar of Education, on the omnipresence of God. “You say that God is everywhere”, Lunacharsky told him. “Now you will surely admit that one could imagine a small box somewhere without God’s being in the box”. “But why suppose an imaginary box”, Hotovitsky retorted, when we have you, Mr. Commissar?”
http://orthodoxhistory.org/

Quote
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)

Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”
38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.




[/quote]
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #52 on: August 24, 2010, 10:37:24 AM »

Alfred Persson,


Interpret this verse for me:

Acts 22:16
And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

What is this verse saying?

Also, what support do you have from the church fathers and early christian writers?

What support do you have from ecumenical councils? When you first came here you said you embraced the Nicene/Constantinople 1 creed. The Nicene/Constantinople 1 creed said:

"one baptism for the forgiveness of sins,"


Why do you believe that you are the only person on the planet that can interpret Scripture correctly? What support do you have for your view from church fathers and church councils?

If you don't have support then your interpretation of Scripture is most likely false.










ICXC NIKA
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #53 on: August 24, 2010, 10:41:17 AM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?

They do get their error from reading Scripture wrongly. Maybe you do, too?
Logged

Love never fails.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,656


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #54 on: August 24, 2010, 01:47:02 PM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?
Do Oneness Pentecostals even use icons?
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #55 on: August 24, 2010, 03:11:11 PM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?
Do Oneness Pentecostals even use icons?

But of course they don't. I doubt that most of them have ever even seen icons. Oneness Pentecostals are yet another branch of Evangelical Protestantism. A.k.a. Bibleolatry.  Tongue
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 03:11:46 PM by Heorhij » Logged

Love never fails.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,656


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #56 on: August 24, 2010, 03:14:37 PM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?
Do Oneness Pentecostals even use icons?

But of course they don't. I doubt that most of them have ever even seen icons. Oneness Pentecostals are yet another branch of Evangelical Protestantism. A.k.a. Bibleolatry.  Tongue
So, then, if icons cannot be to blame because Oneness Pentecostals don't use them, then there can be only one cause of their modalist heresy: an errant reading of the Scriptures (much like Alfred's errant reading of the Scriptures?).
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 03:15:05 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #57 on: August 24, 2010, 03:28:16 PM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?
Do Oneness Pentecostals even use icons?

But of course they don't. I doubt that most of them have ever even seen icons. Oneness Pentecostals are yet another branch of Evangelical Protestantism. A.k.a. Bibleolatry.  Tongue
So, then, if icons cannot be to blame because Oneness Pentecostals don't use them, then there can be only one cause of their modalist heresy: an errant reading of the Scriptures (much like Alfred's errant reading of the Scriptures?).

Absolutely. I am sure that's exactly the case.
Logged

Love never fails.
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #58 on: August 24, 2010, 07:30:27 PM »

Alfred Persson,


Interpret this verse for me:

Acts 22:16
And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

What is this verse saying?

Also, what support do you have from the church fathers and early christian writers?

What support do you have from ecumenical councils? When you first came here you said you embraced the Nicene/Constantinople 1 creed. The Nicene/Constantinople 1 creed said:

"one baptism for the forgiveness of sins,"


Why do you believe that you are the only person on the planet that can interpret Scripture correctly? What support do you have for your view from church fathers and church councils?

If you don't have support then your interpretation of Scripture is most likely false.



Peter says precisely what he means, but you misunderstand him, he is very clear that baptism, washing with water, are not what saves, its when a person repents and believes in Christ=answer of a good conscience to God, that results in the power of Christ's resurrection, regenerating your soul so that it becomes a "new creature""

There is also an antitype which now saves us-- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (1Pe 3:21 NKJ)

I and the fathers are in perfect agreement, they never cite each other and say "thus it is written," nor do I cite them that way.

The fathers never cite each other and say, "thus saith the LORD," nor do I cite them them that way.

The Fathers never say the consensus of the Fathers rules the roost, and neither do I.

As a primitive Christian, you will note my posts are just like their writings, they cite scripture to prove their points, so do I!



I reject all ecumenical councils, all of them. It does not matter the first taught truth, it bore nasty fruit as the church became enamored with itself and it began making rule upon rule:

 13 But the word of the LORD was to them, "Precept upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little," That they might go and fall backward, and be broken And snared and caught. (Isa 28:13 NKJ)


AND I don't believe I am the only person who can interpret scripture.

Why do you believe God wrote to confuse everyone?



« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 07:31:38 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #59 on: August 24, 2010, 08:30:04 PM »

LOL ... it's those ecumenical councils you reject that compiled the Scriptures you're using to reject them! 

Oh well, I give thanks to God every day that "He remembers that we are dust" - someday He'll settle all these little squabbles amongst His quarrelling children ...

So how hot is it in your area today, Alfred?  Here it's 105 and rising ... Smiley
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2010, 08:50:40 PM »

LOL ... it's those ecumenical councils you reject that compiled the Scriptures you're using to reject them! 

Oh well, I give thanks to God every day that "He remembers that we are dust" - someday He'll settle all these little squabbles amongst His quarrelling children ...

So how hot is it in your area today, Alfred?  Here it's 105 and rising ... Smiley

Yes, a scorcher, southern California Inland Empire hot...but at night it will drop down to 64. Love that.

If I lived at the time of Nicea...I would have agreed to it like everyone else, but from my perspective now...seeing how it resulted in men running the show, instead of Christ...I say no to all of them.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2010, 09:57:47 PM »

Well, you have a right to your opinion ... just be aware others don't share your opinion, and be humble enough to admit that you might be wrong (as might we).  God knows our hearts and He knows WHY each of us thinks the way we do ... and I have it on good authority that He is "patient and long-suffering".

Try to stay cool - don't get hot under the collar! Smiley
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2010, 11:10:58 PM »

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)

Incorrect, otherwise the Baptism would have been unnecessary; Peter commanded rightly that they also be baptized, to complete the "born again" process - "born from above of water and the Spirit."  One cannot be excluded, just as it is not with us - as we are born again of water (Baptism) and the Spirit (Chrismation).
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 11:11:27 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.
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #63 on: August 24, 2010, 11:29:17 PM »

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)

Incorrect, otherwise the Baptism would have been unnecessary; Peter commanded rightly that they also be baptized, to complete the "born again" process - "born from above of water and the Spirit."  One cannot be excluded, just as it is not with us - as we are born again of water (Baptism) and the Spirit (Chrismation).

Impossible, Peter says they received the Holy Spirit just as the he and those with him...so the process was completed.

Born of water and spirit is born of repentance and regeneration, you are confusing the two as one. If regeneration came because of water, then spirit wouldn't be mentioned, it would be redundant. That it is the Spirit who gives life, not the water, is seen in vss 6, 8, only the Spirit is mentioned.

5 Jesus answered,  “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.  7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.-nkjv

Peter was clear, its not the water or baptism that regenerates, its resurrection power that raised Jesus from the dead in response to repentance, the answer of a good conscience with God:

NKJ  1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us-- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (1Pe 3:21 NKJ)



Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #64 on: August 24, 2010, 11:37:45 PM »

Well, you have a right to your opinion ... just be aware others don't share your opinion, and be humble enough to admit that you might be wrong (as might we).  God knows our hearts and He knows WHY each of us thinks the way we do ... and I have it on good authority that He is "patient and long-suffering".

Try to stay cool - don't get hot under the collar! Smiley

I will try...My only concern is Christ rule in your heart... that His path be made straight. I'm not here to lead any to another church, they all have fault, all have gone astray...One can remain in the church where they are, and do right by Christ.

I have a big view of the One Universal Church, according to 1 Cor 3:10-15 it covers lots of different denominations, as long as they have the one foundation of Christ, its irrelevant what their other beliefs are.

 10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it.
 11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
 12 Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw,
 13 each one's work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one's work, of what sort it is.
 14 If anyone's work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward.
 15 If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
 (1Co 3:10-15 NKJ)

Even those in churches made of straw will be saved yet as though they fled a burning building, with only their salvation intact, no rewards because they did build with straw = human traditions.


Icon's upset me because I see them as interfering with a personal relationship with God, I am quite certain God hates all images of Him, so I am "hot" on that.

But the other things...if Christ indwells, He does everything in His own time which might not be till the Kingdom comes...I don't judge you:

11 For it is written: "As I live, says the LORD, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God."
 12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way.
 (Rom 14:11-13 NKJ)

I am convinced all in Christ will be saved, regardless whether they are Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, or Other like me (primitive Orthodox). But I know the Joy of Christ's indwelling, so I want to share that with others.

Of course I will argue any doctrine of the faith, but that isn't as important as Christ indwelling. Anything that stops that, I hate and I am convinced icons do.

See...now you made me ramble...its back to work...

May our God grant peace to your house
al
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 11:41:31 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
sainthieu
Abstractor of the Quintessence
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 621


« Reply #65 on: August 24, 2010, 11:49:47 PM »

Al: You're not going to convert anyone here any time soon. Go away. You''re boring.
Logged
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #66 on: August 24, 2010, 11:52:01 PM »

Hey, he has a right to post here till the mods tell him otherwise.  If it's boring to you, don't read it. 
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #67 on: August 25, 2010, 12:01:27 AM »

Well, you have a right to your opinion ... just be aware others don't share your opinion, and be humble enough to admit that you might be wrong (as might we).  God knows our hearts and He knows WHY each of us thinks the way we do ... and I have it on good authority that He is "patient and long-suffering".

Try to stay cool - don't get hot under the collar! Smiley

I've been going through the Fathers, and am finding my exegesis of Mat 16:18 often, that confessing the divine revelation Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God= born again.

I will post these after I gather them...here is one:

And perhaps that which Simon Peter answered and said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God, ”65 if we say it as Peter, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto us, but by the light from the Father in heaven shining in our heart, we too become as Peter, being pronounced blessed as he was, because that the grounds on which he was pronounced blessed apply also to us, by reason of the fact that flesh and blood have not revealed to us with regard to Jesus that He is Christ, the Son of the living God, but the Father in heaven, from the very heavens, that our citizenship may be in heaven,66 revealing to us the revelation which carries up to heaven those who take away every veil from the heart, and receive “the spirit of the wisdom and revelation” of God.67 And if we too have said like Peter, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” not as if flesh and blood had revealed it unto us, but by light from the Father in heaven having shone in our heart, we become a Peter, and to us there might be said by the Word, “Thou art Peter,” etc.68 For a rock69 is every disciple of Christ of whom those drank who drank of the spiritual rock which followed them,70 and upon every such rock is built every word of the church, add the polity in accordance with it; for in each of the perfect, who have the combination of words and deeds and thoughts which fill up the blessedness, is the church built by God.-Origin, From the Second Book of the Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew, Book XII, 10.

Many then will say to the Saviour, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God; ”but not all who say this will say it to Him, as not at all having learned it by the revelation of flesh and blood but by the Father in heaven Himself taking away the veil that lay upon their heart, in order that after this “with unveiled face reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord”76 they may speak through the Spirit of God saying concerning Him, “Lord Jesus,” and to Him, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”77 And if any one says this to Him, not by flesh and blood revealing it unto Him but through the Father in heaven, he will obtain the things that were spoken according to the letter of the Gospel to that Peter, but, as the spirit of the Gospel teaches, to every one who becomes such as that Peter was. For all bear the surname of “rock” who are the imitators of Christ, that is, of the spiritual rock which followed those who are being saved,78 that they may drink from it the spiritual draught. But these bear the surname of the rock just as Christ does.-Ibid, 11.

Roberts, A., Donaldson, J., & Coxe, A. C. (1997). The Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. X  : Translations of the writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325. The Gospel of Peter by Professor J. Armitage Robinson, Introduction and Synoptical Table by Andrew Rutherfurd, B.D. (456). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems.

Roberts, A., Donaldson, J., & Coxe, A. C. (1997). The Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. X  : Translations of the writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325. The Gospel of Peter by Professor J. Armitage Robinson, Introduction and Synoptical Table by Andrew Rutherfurd, B.D. (455). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 12:20:59 AM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #68 on: August 25, 2010, 12:36:23 AM »

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)

Incorrect, otherwise the Baptism would have been unnecessary; Peter commanded rightly that they also be baptized, to complete the "born again" process - "born from above of water and the Spirit."  One cannot be excluded, just as it is not with us - as we are born again of water (Baptism) and the Spirit (Chrismation).

Impossible, Peter says they received the Holy Spirit just as the he and those with him...so the process was completed.

Born of water and spirit is born of repentance and regeneration, you are confusing the two as one. If regeneration came because of water, then spirit wouldn't be mentioned, it would be redundant. That it is the Spirit who gives life, not the water, is seen in vss 6, 8, only the Spirit is mentioned.

5 Jesus answered,  “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.  7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.-nkjv

Peter was clear, its not the water or baptism that regenerates, its resurrection power that raised Jesus from the dead in response to repentance, the answer of a good conscience with God:

NKJ  1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us-- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (1Pe 3:21 NKJ)

According to your logic, there was no reason to Baptize them, as they had already received the Spirit; and yet Peter "commanded" them to be baptized.  Why?  Was he performing an empty act?  A vain repetition?  Testing their obedience to his authority?  Doing something to not cause scandal amongst the Jewish believers?  No, but rather doing what he must, by completing the Divine-human cooperation represented in the "water and the Spirit" formula.  Christ commanded "water and the Spirit," a formula which directs for two not one.  If you wish to state otherwise, the burden of proof lies with you to do so, since the interpretation I've put forth aligns with the literal formula from Christ's mouth as recorded in the scripture.
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.
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #69 on: August 25, 2010, 09:01:35 AM »

Yes, and these were saved before water baptism so you are wrong, God doesn't fit in your tiny box:

 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.
 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.
 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
 (Act 10:44-48 NKJ)

Incorrect, otherwise the Baptism would have been unnecessary; Peter commanded rightly that they also be baptized, to complete the "born again" process - "born from above of water and the Spirit."  One cannot be excluded, just as it is not with us - as we are born again of water (Baptism) and the Spirit (Chrismation).

Impossible, Peter says they received the Holy Spirit just as the he and those with him...so the process was completed.

Born of water and spirit is born of repentance and regeneration, you are confusing the two as one. If regeneration came because of water, then spirit wouldn't be mentioned, it would be redundant. That it is the Spirit who gives life, not the water, is seen in vss 6, 8, only the Spirit is mentioned.

5 Jesus answered,  “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.  7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.-nkjv

Peter was clear, its not the water or baptism that regenerates, its resurrection power that raised Jesus from the dead in response to repentance, the answer of a good conscience with God:

NKJ  1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us-- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (1Pe 3:21 NKJ)

According to your logic, there was no reason to Baptize them, as they had already received the Spirit; and yet Peter "commanded" them to be baptized.  Why?  Was he performing an empty act?  A vain repetition?  Testing their obedience to his authority?  Doing something to not cause scandal amongst the Jewish believers?  No, but rather doing what he must, by completing the Divine-human cooperation represented in the "water and the Spirit" formula.  Christ commanded "water and the Spirit," a formula which directs for two not one.  If you wish to state otherwise, the burden of proof lies with you to do so, since the interpretation I've put forth aligns with the literal formula from Christ's mouth as recorded in the scripture.

Baptism is not an empty act, but it is an act, not something that acts on us.

Baptism is an ordinance commanded by Christ (Mt 28:19). and symbolizes our union with Christ into death & resurrection (Rom 6:3f), but it does not act on us, regenerate...that is what the Holy Spirit does.

The use of water is closely connected t purification in the Law...We repent, confess sin, and are "purified" by the water...but its in symbol only, not actual:

which now saves us-- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

NKJ  1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us-- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

KJV  1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

NET  1 Peter 3:21 And this prefigured baptism, which now saves you– not the washing off of physical dirt but the pledge of a good conscience to God– through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

MIT  1 Peter 3:21 That experience also now provides you an analogy of rescue by baptism—not the bathing off of filth from flesh, but a good conscience responding to God on the basis of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 09:03:47 AM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
recent convert
Orthodox Chrisitan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian (N.A.)
Posts: 1,917


« Reply #70 on: August 25, 2010, 09:52:51 AM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?
Do Oneness Pentecostals even use icons?

But of course they don't. I doubt that most of them have ever even seen icons. Oneness Pentecostals are yet another branch of Evangelical Protestantism. A.k.a. Bibleolatry.  Tongue
Is Alfred a Trinitarian Christian?
Logged

Antiochian OC N.A.
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #71 on: August 25, 2010, 01:49:57 PM »

LOL ... when someone replies to you WITH Scripture verses you either ignore them or assert they have misinterpreted them.  

When someone replies to you WITHOUT Scripture verses you complain that they have nothing to back up their statements.

Is the heat getting to you, Alfred? Cheesy

Incorrect, correctly interpret scripture and I will be pleased, I promise.

30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”
31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:


      “ He was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
      And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
       So He opened not His mouth.
       33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
      And who will declare His generation?
      For His life is taken from the earth.”

34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, “I ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Acts 8:30-38

You should state your argument, lest I not see your point. Apparently you believe scripture contradicts itself, or the apostle Peter was wrong that the answer of a good conscience is what saves, not the water washing the flesh.

I don't believe that.

There is a difference between following an accepted practice, and explaining that practice. Peter's explanation of what saves, the answer of a good conscience, is directly relevant and material to what saves....whereas a report of a baptism, being it isn't addressing the precise issue Peter was discussing, does not contradict Peter, because then you are superimposing your interpretation onto that baptism---assuming its correct, and using that to contradict Peter. You have no authority to contradict Peter.

« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 01:56:04 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #72 on: August 25, 2010, 01:58:32 PM »

LOL ... when someone replies to you WITH Scripture verses you either ignore them or assert they have misinterpreted them.  

When someone replies to you WITHOUT Scripture verses you complain that they have nothing to back up their statements.

Is the heat getting to you, Alfred? Cheesy

Incorrect, correctly interpret scripture and I will be pleased, I promise.

30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah, and said, “Do you understand what you are reading?”
31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 The place in the Scripture which he read was this:


      “ He was led as a sheep to the slaughter;
      And as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
       So He opened not His mouth.
       33 In His humiliation His justice was taken away,
      And who will declare His generation?
      For His life is taken from the earth.”

34 So the eunuch answered Philip and said, “I ask you, of whom does the prophet say this, of himself or of some other man?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Acts 8:30-38

You should state your argument, lest I not see your point. Apparently you believe scripture contradicts itself,

No, just shows that your misunderstanding contradicts itself and scripture.

or the apostle Peter was wrong that the answer of a good conscience is what saves, not the water washing the flesh.

No, the Church of Peter and the Apostles, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church, washes sins. Baptism by pretenders only gets your flesh wet.

I don't believe that.


"We believe in One Baptism for the remission of sins." So says Christ's Church.

What you believe is immaterial.

There is a difference between following an accepted practice, and explaining that practice. Peter's explanation of what saves, the answer of a good conscience, is directly relevant and material to what saves....whereas a report of a baptism, being it isn't addressing the precise issue Peter was discussing, does not contradict Peter, because then you are superimposing your interpretation onto that baptism, and assuming its correct, and using that to contradict Peter.
No, he is just understanding the Church's teaching of the book she wrote. Whereas the exogesis he quotes will fit all the verses on Baptism, your idiosyncretic eisogesis will not.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #73 on: August 25, 2010, 02:01:27 PM »

Alfred, may I ask, what do you think about the so-called Oneness Pentecostalism? The reason I am asking is that the adherents of this movement have the same tendency you show: pick a great number of quotes from the Bible and support their "idea" that there is no Trinity.

They are heretical, I blame icons for their error, they combine the whole Christ, body soul, divinity, in one tiny image.

They certainly don't get their error from scripture, or do you accuse God of writing to confuse them?
Do Oneness Pentecostals even use icons?

But of course they don't. I doubt that most of them have ever even seen icons. Oneness Pentecostals are yet another branch of Evangelical Protestantism. A.k.a. Bibleolatry.  Tongue
Is Alfred a Trinitarian Christian?

Yes, I am. No to the filioque however.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #74 on: August 25, 2010, 03:52:47 PM »

Not one scripture quote, not even a citation of a father, nothing but your claims of this and that. I claim you are wrong...so now we are even.

I just spent 4 hours putting scripture quotes to everything in my reply and my internet connection messed up when I went to post. Please forgive me for not taking another 4 hours to look everything back up and rewrite everything.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #75 on: August 25, 2010, 04:46:31 PM »


Quote
Is Alfred a Trinitarian Christian?

Yes, I am. No to the filioque however.

What iconoclast believes in the Nicene Creed without the filoque unless you reinvented Roman Catholicism to suit your own belief systems?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #76 on: August 25, 2010, 06:31:01 PM »

I warned all I proselytize for Christ, not any denomination as none of them are right, all have gone astray.

And that's why you're starting up your new religious affiliation? Will Elijah care about that one either?

Could you ego get any more inflated?

Stop throwing all your Bible verses at me. The Church that canonized them went astray, so I don't have to recognize their authority.

Stay tuned to get my newly restored Gospel, written on golden tablets which I am currently translating:



LOL. Don't let Lucy Harris get it.


Its sad...when I recall John of Damascus, all he wrote, and compare  his output

You would have to read him first to recall all he wrote, and you amply demonstrated in your thread slandering him and blaspheming God that you haven't a clue as to what he, and He, wrote.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,29148.0.html

with your icon copy paste, that says nothing important.

Then ignore it.

Its sad.

yes, watching you inherit the wind is.

Why not try citing scripture or the fathers, anything of value...comedy central?...
because your posts are Comedy Central material.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 06:36:20 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #77 on: August 25, 2010, 09:50:42 PM »


Quote
Is Alfred a Trinitarian Christian?

Yes, I am. No to the filioque however.

What iconoclast believes in the Nicene Creed without the filoque unless you reinvented Roman Catholicism to suit your own belief systems?

While I accept just about all of the first few councils...I don't always agree with the consequences. For example, yes, Mary is theotokos, you cannot separate the divine nature from the Person, the Person was incarnate in the flesh, therefore Mary is "God bearer" or "mother of God."

But it doesn't follow we should call her that, the words imply much more than the orthodox equation, there are folks who hear the title, and conclude Mary is Mother of His divinity.

AND as the scripture NEVER calls Mary "Mother of God", the title itself cannot be part of the deposit of the faith the apostles "once delivered" to us in the first century:

NKJ  Jude 1:3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. (Jud 1:3 NKJ)

Therefore, although the logic might be impeccable, its not "apostolic doctrine" we use the title. It is self evident it implies much more than what the Orthodox mean, therefore the title's use does not follow the apostolic command to stand fast in apostolic tradition that we received, either through their preached word (which became the NT), or letter, which now are Bible books.

NKJ  2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle. (2Th 2:15 NKJ)

By the way, the above is why I believe in sola scriptura...I can only believe what the apostles themselves taught, and as their material can be found uncorrupted only in scripture...sola scriptura.

This does not mean I won't consider extra-biblical tradition or data, I do it all the time, it only means that is never on the same level as scripture, it alone is the arbiter of truth.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 10:00:16 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #78 on: August 25, 2010, 09:58:48 PM »

While I accept just about all of the first few councils...I don't always agree with the consequences. For example, yes, Mary is theotokos, you cannot separate the divine nature from the Person, the Person was incarnate in the flesh, therefore Mary is "God bearer" or "mother of God."

But it doesn't follow we should call her that, the words imply much more than the orthodox equation, there are folks who hear the title, and conclude Mary is Mother of His divinity.

AND as the scripture NEVER calls Mary "Mother of God", the title itself cannot be part of the deposit of the faith the apostles "once delivered" to us in the first century:

And Elizabeth said, "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?"  (Luke 1:43)

So Alfred - who would Elizabeth, a devout Jew who lived BEFORE Christ was born, consider her "Lord"?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 09:59:33 PM by theistgal » Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #79 on: August 25, 2010, 10:02:33 PM »

While I accept just about all of the first few councils...I don't always agree with the consequences. For example, yes, Mary is theotokos, you cannot separate the divine nature from the Person, the Person was incarnate in the flesh, therefore Mary is "God bearer" or "mother of God."

But it doesn't follow we should call her that, the words imply much more than the orthodox equation, there are folks who hear the title, and conclude Mary is Mother of His divinity.

AND as the scripture NEVER calls Mary "Mother of God", the title itself cannot be part of the deposit of the faith the apostles "once delivered" to us in the first century:

And Elizabeth said, "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?"  (Luke 1:43)

So Alfred - who would Elizabeth, a devout Jew who lived BEFORE Christ was born, consider her "Lord"?

Still don't see God teaching we must proclaim Mary is Mother of God.

Our preaching is to be the gospel of Christ, who He is, what He taught, His death and resurrection, etc. Not once do the apostles preach about Mary, they are focused on Christ.

So its like agreeing with Ephesus against Nestorius, yet declining to use the title because its not apostolic doctrine we use it.


I can agree with you the idea of Mary being mother of God is there in that text, yet disagree about the propriety of us proclaiming that...the apostles didn't, neither should we...its not part of the Gospel they preached.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 10:05:39 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #80 on: August 25, 2010, 10:17:36 PM »

Alfred Persson,


How do the fathers interpret the Scriptures you quote?
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #81 on: August 25, 2010, 10:17:51 PM »

What I'm saying is that "Mother of my LORD" to Elizabeth MEANT "Mother of God", and since that's right there in Scripture, then: 

"Ipso facto, ergo sum,
God says Mary is His Mum!"

(and ours too!) Cheesy
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #82 on: August 25, 2010, 10:22:02 PM »

Alfred Persson,


What is your view or interpretation of "the rule of faith"? Or what some might call "the scope of faith"?

Do you know what the fathers and nonfathers had to say about the "rule of faith"? So why should we depart from that when interpreting the Scriptures?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 10:22:41 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,093


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #83 on: August 25, 2010, 10:28:37 PM »

I can agree with you the idea of Mary being mother of God is there in that text, yet disagree about the propriety of us proclaiming that...the apostles didn't, neither should we...its not part of the Gospel they preached.

Yikes, argumentum ex silentio.  You do understand that, at best, you're "guessing," right?  Unless you're postulating that 100% of everything that the Apostles ever said, from the time they met Jesus until the time they each died, is recorded and preserved somewhere where we can find it.  Abductive reasoning has its pitfalls; yes, we must use it sometimes, but in the field of Theology one must be careful when trying your hand at it, since it very frequently leads to heresy, as Arius, Nestorius, et al. can attest.
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.
genesisone
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,503



« Reply #84 on: August 25, 2010, 10:48:51 PM »

But it doesn't follow we should call her that, the words imply much more than the orthodox equation, there are folks who hear the title, and conclude Mary is Mother of His divinity.

You are quite right that you are not the only person to draw wrong conclusions about the Orthodox faith. Perhaps a little humility to try to learn what is taught might be in order
Quote
....apostolic tradition that we received, either through their preached word (which became the NT), or letter, which now are Bible books.

Please clarify. It appears that you're saying the NT is a collection of sermons, but apparently not Bible books. Any guesses what happened to anything else the Apostles might have said or written?

Quote
This does not mean I won't consider extra-biblical tradition or data, I do it all the time, it only means that is never on the same level as scripture, it alone is the arbiter of truth.

So scripture (or did you mean Scripture) outranks the Holy Spirit?
"However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth...."(John 16:13, NKJV)

And please don't try to explain it away by saying something like, "the Holy Spirit will guide you into all scriptural truth....; or "all truth as contained in the Scriptures". But somehow I think you are more likely to tell me that the Holy Spirit is limited by the words of Scripture.
Logged
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #85 on: August 25, 2010, 11:34:45 PM »

I can agree with you the idea of Mary being mother of God is there in that text, yet disagree about the propriety of us proclaiming that...the apostles didn't, neither should we...its not part of the Gospel they preached.

Yikes, argumentum ex silentio.  You do understand that, at best, you're "guessing," right?  Unless you're postulating that 100% of everything that the Apostles ever said, from the time they met Jesus until the time they each died, is recorded and preserved somewhere where we can find it.  Abductive reasoning has its pitfalls; yes, we must use it sometimes, but in the field of Theology one must be careful when trying your hand at it, since it very frequently leads to heresy, as Arius, Nestorius, et al. can attest.

Incorrect, I argue for the gospel the apostles preached, ruling out what they didn't preach.

I never said the idea can't be discussed when appropriate, say in disputes about Christ's divinity. The text clearly implies the pre-existent Lord was in Mary's womb. It has its place in the body of texts that prove Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal Son of God.

But Catholicism made it a title, and Marian veneration is now greater than what Jesus receives. To suggest we need Mary's intercession to motivate God to help us, when He sent His only begotten Son to save us, is an insult and a lie, close to blaspheming God. Only those who don't know God can believe they need Mary's intercession to gain His attention and help. Christians are the apple of His eye, His help is always there for us, He is always focused on each one of us, we are His delight, His children. A loving parent doesn't need the intercession of inlaws before they care for their children.

« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 11:41:23 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #86 on: August 25, 2010, 11:46:23 PM »

Alfred Persson,


What is your view or interpretation of "the rule of faith"? Or what some might call "the scope of faith"?

Do you know what the fathers and nonfathers had to say about the "rule of faith"? So why should we depart from that when interpreting the Scriptures?

For me, the "scope of the faith", is the deposit of the apostles, and that material is found today ONLY in our Scripture, not church tradition...the latter is hearsay, not on the same level as direct witness.


Show me where the fathers (up to Nicea, not after), cite the consensus of the fathers, or each other as authority. It appears to me they cite scripture.

A few appeal to the universal interpretation of a text, saying "thus saith the Catholic church", meaning the interpretation, as it is believed everywhere in the church, must be  "apostolic", otherwise what explains the interpretation's "catholicity."

But they didn't mean the church was the source of the teaching, rather they believed the apostles had to be.

So it seems to me the ECF's believed as I do, not as you. Correct me if I am wrong, cite their words citing each other as authority...or appealing to a consensus of the fathers. Thanks in advance.


« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 11:51:59 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,438



WWW
« Reply #87 on: August 25, 2010, 11:53:58 PM »

I can agree with you the idea of Mary being mother of God is there in that text, yet disagree about the propriety of us proclaiming that...the apostles didn't, neither should we...its not part of the Gospel they preached.

Yikes, argumentum ex silentio.  You do understand that, at best, you're "guessing," right?  Unless you're postulating that 100% of everything that the Apostles ever said, from the time they met Jesus until the time they each died, is recorded and preserved somewhere where we can find it.  Abductive reasoning has its pitfalls; yes, we must use it sometimes, but in the field of Theology one must be careful when trying your hand at it, since it very frequently leads to heresy, as Arius, Nestorius, et al. can attest.

Incorrect, I argue for the gospel the apostles preached, ruling out what they didn't preach.

I never said the idea can't be discussed when appropriate, say in disputes about Christ's divinity. The text clearly implies the pre-existent Lord was in Mary's womb. It has its place in the body of texts that prove Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal Son of God.

But Catholicism made it a title, and Marian veneration is now greater than what Jesus receives. To suggest we need Mary's intercession to motivate God to help us, when He sent His only begotten Son to save us, is an insult and a lie, close to blaspheming God. Only those who don't know God can believe they need Mary's intercession to gain His attention and help. Christians are the apple of His eye, His help is always there for us, He is always focused on each one of us, we are His delight, His children. A loving parent doesn't need the intercession of inlaws before they care for their children.



Is it an insult or close to blaspheming God to ask a friend, pastor, or church(what we'd call a parish) to pray for you?  Is it taking the role of God to pray for someone else? 
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #88 on: August 26, 2010, 12:00:38 AM »

Methinks our friend Alfred, along with Mel Gibson and Anne Rice have created 3 distinct sects of Roman Catholicism without being One, Holy, Catholic or Apostolic.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,656


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #89 on: August 26, 2010, 02:35:13 AM »

Alfred Persson,


What is your view or interpretation of "the rule of faith"? Or what some might call "the scope of faith"?

Do you know what the fathers and nonfathers had to say about the "rule of faith"? So why should we depart from that when interpreting the Scriptures?

For me, the "scope of the faith", is the deposit of the apostles, and that material is found today ONLY in our Scripture
Something you have yet to prove to my satisfaction...  And don't give me this baloney that man cannot help but write down divine revelation.
Logged
Tags: Perssonism Troll Apostolic Doctrine Eucharist born again Incarnation cheval mort figurative language going around in circles 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.214 seconds with 71 queries.