OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 03:50:58 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  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Do you believe that Jesus ate Kosher?  (Read 5426 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #90 on: May 11, 2011, 11:03:47 AM »

Yeshuaisiam, I am about to head to bed, but I have to say this:

Please, for your own spiritual benefit, STOP INTERPRETING THE SCRIPTURE ON YOUR OWN.

You are assessing Orthodoxy through the lens of your own interpretation of scripture. This is not only blatant protestantism, it is also very spiritually damaging, because you are basically defining the limits of truth and then seeking to find a faith that agrees with those limits you yourself have imposed. There is no spiritual growth without challenge, change of the mind and transformation of the heart.

I believe a Hindu guru said "when I am studying Christianity, I take down my images of the Hindu gods and put up images of the Christian saints". This means when examining a faith you have to take it on its own terms. You have to do this, because every single aspect of a faith is intertwined with every other aspect. You can't dissect Orthodox doctrine according to what you feel the scriptures say: you must meet it on its own terms.

Because you don't accept basic things that most of us here accept -- our Lord's Jewishness, Paul's authority, the ramifications of the Virgin being Theotokos -- it is basically impossible for us to lead you to the true Orthodox teaching on other matters, because all these things are intertwined.

I really think you are doing yourself a great disservice by refusing to engage with Orthodox teaching on its own terms. Just accept, as a mental exercise, that the four gospels are true, that Paul has teaching authority, that the Church is mystically the very body of Christ, that the Mosaic law does not apply to non-Jews. If you do that, we will be able to have a meaningful conversation on issues like "did Jesus eat kosher and should we?".

Once you have really immersed yourself in Orthodox teachings and met Orthodoxy on its own turf, so to speak, you can then decide to jettison all these things and to reject them. But, for your own sake, stop trying to force Orthodoxy into the box of your own preconceptions, because it probably isn't going to fit.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,757


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #91 on: May 11, 2011, 11:38:55 AM »

This is no secret, that EO & RC does wrong calling priests "Father", when God directly commanded "Do not call any man Father... Or Rabbi".  Priests are presbyters & teachers.  Through Paul, we call priests "father".

No matter what explanation or apologetics are given, this is directly DEFYING God.  God said "Do NOT CALL any man FATHER".   Period.
Fathers in Christ =/= Fathers of their own authority and prototypos.
So do all of you want to call an individual that murdered Christians in cold blood, then had an enlightening moment, then directly taught AGAINST what Yeshua taught us, to call men "father".  Is that a disciple?

I feel many times people take Paul as an apostle because that's what they've been told to think.  Not because they consider what he actually taught.
"Having always have done so" doesn't make it right.   Jesus said do not call men "fahter", and through Paul, we call men father.

So no, I wouldn't say Paul was an apostle.
Of course, history is written by the vicars, and the vicars made him one.  But God did not choose him while he was flesh on Earth.

Perhaps some would say I have deeper faith issues being extremely skeptical of anything Paul teaches.
You don't understand how to reconcile apparent contradictions, and so you erroneously declare one thing false and another true. This is a most illogical and close-minded way of thinking.  Undecided Your argument is of the same ilk as Christ Myth Theorists, 9/11 Truthers and Intelligent Design proponents.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 11:39:06 AM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,088


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #92 on: May 11, 2011, 11:40:03 AM »

Yeshuaisiam, I am about to head to bed, but I have to say this:

Please, for your own spiritual benefit, STOP INTERPRETING THE SCRIPTURE ON YOUR OWN.

You are assessing Orthodoxy through the lens of your own interpretation of scripture. This is not only blatant protestantism, it is also very spiritually damaging, because you are basically defining the limits of truth and then seeking to find a faith that agrees with those limits you yourself have imposed. There is no spiritual growth without challenge, change of the mind and transformation of the heart.

I believe a Hindu guru said "when I am studying Christianity, I take down my images of the Hindu gods and put up images of the Christian saints". This means when examining a faith you have to take it on its own terms. You have to do this, because every single aspect of a faith is intertwined with every other aspect. You can't dissect Orthodox doctrine according to what you feel the scriptures say: you must meet it on its own terms.

Because you don't accept basic things that most of us here accept -- our Lord's Jewishness, Paul's authority, the ramifications of the Virgin being Theotokos -- it is basically impossible for us to lead you to the true Orthodox teaching on other matters, because all these things are intertwined.

I really think you are doing yourself a great disservice by refusing to engage with Orthodox teaching on its own terms. Just accept, as a mental exercise, that the four gospels are true, that Paul has teaching authority, that the Church is mystically the very body of Christ, that the Mosaic law does not apply to non-Jews. If you do that, we will be able to have a meaningful conversation on issues like "did Jesus eat kosher and should we?".

Once you have really immersed yourself in Orthodox teachings and met Orthodoxy on its own turf, so to speak, you can then decide to jettison all these things and to reject them. But, for your own sake, stop trying to force Orthodoxy into the box of your own preconceptions, because it probably isn't going to fit.

I know my friend.  I completely hear you and understand.
I believe you are right.

So basically I'm going to have one of two choices.

1) To accept Orthodoxy.
2) To reject Orthodoxy.

Despite my issues or questions.
Wow.  I probably have a ton of praying to do.  I just don't know if I can stop thinking up stuff.
How can one directly just "Stop" in their tracks and how their mind works and just put a huge damper on it... and join in?

That will be the challenge of my life.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,088


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #93 on: May 11, 2011, 11:56:52 AM »

This is no secret, that EO & RC does wrong calling priests "Father", when God directly commanded "Do not call any man Father... Or Rabbi".  Priests are presbyters & teachers.  Through Paul, we call priests "father".

No matter what explanation or apologetics are given, this is directly DEFYING God.  God said "Do NOT CALL any man FATHER".   Period.
Fathers in Christ =/= Fathers of their own authority and prototypos.
So do all of you want to call an individual that murdered Christians in cold blood, then had an enlightening moment, then directly taught AGAINST what Yeshua taught us, to call men "father".  Is that a disciple?

I feel many times people take Paul as an apostle because that's what they've been told to think.  Not because they consider what he actually taught.
"Having always have done so" doesn't make it right.   Jesus said do not call men "fahter", and through Paul, we call men father.

So no, I wouldn't say Paul was an apostle.
Of course, history is written by the vicars, and the vicars made him one.  But God did not choose him while he was flesh on Earth.

Perhaps some would say I have deeper faith issues being extremely skeptical of anything Paul teaches.
You don't understand how to reconcile apparent contradictions, and so you erroneously declare one thing false and another true. This is a most illogical and close-minded way of thinking.  Undecided Your argument is of the same ilk as Christ Myth Theorists, 9/11 Truthers and Intelligent Design proponents.

I don't think that's fair and it sort of demogogues me & my point in hypotheticals you came up with.
Jesus said "call no man Father".
You say "because of this and this" we can call people "Father".

If you believe Jesus is God, do you believe "this and this", or obey God himself?

I have no issues dealing in contradictions so long as they make sense.

But I obviously have a ton of praying to do.  I seriously may be hopeless to become EO, but I'm trying.  Just know that I'm not trying to be personally "in your face", but many of these issues I ask about have brewed in me for years.

My wife and I once attended a protestant church (one time) because a family friend wanted us to come to their son's play afterwards.  We ended up in Sunday school.  A few minutes into it they started talking about "your own personal relationship with Jesus Christ"... My reply was "but even John the Baptist wasn't worthy of untying his sandals".... Later they started literally "praying for financial help", and I asked "how can we be praying for financial help when all of us are wearing the garments from the slave labor of children in sweat shops - we have it better than most of the world".

Anyway, I was asked to leave.

That's what led into a year of some study and we ended up at an Amish/Mennonite church because I felt like a hypocrite wearing sweat shop clothes.  They were a very honest bunch, very practicing in Christianity, but very "basic" is the way I'd describe it.   PLAIN.  no fluff. The issue there "who voted in the bible books"?.  They didn't know.  o...k....   I explained the EO / RC split and going back to the "Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church".  They were fine by that.  I asked "if they were wrong why do we use their Bible they voted"?  No answer.   Awesome people... I mean Awesome.  But no answer. 

If they did answer that God "wanted his word" untarnished and used them to deliver his message unscathed, then they'd be stuck saying the councils voted the will of the Holy Spirit.


So you see.  I've been through a rut, and trust me, I could bore you guys with my story. 
So that led in vast research and I watched Bishiops duking it out over Ecumenism and creating irony on the Canon.

I'm just seeking TRUTH.

Perhaps nobody will be able to explain.  I'm not sure.
But please pray for me, and I will pray for guidance too.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #94 on: May 11, 2011, 02:04:34 PM »

Paul is an Apostle because Christ Himself met Paul, after His death and resurrection, and after Pentecost.  Christ conferred the status of Apostle on Paul by directly ordaining him, much as he did for the 12 (if I am mistaken here, please someone correct me, it's been a while since I read Paul's account of his conversion).

As for Christ not taking his flesh from the Virgin, the Nestorian heresy was dealt with long ago, and perhaps you ought to consider yourself an Assyrian "Christian" instead of an Orthodox Christian.

As for "call no man father" what do you call the man whose seed impregnated your mother?  Do you call him M.W.S.I.M.M. (an acronym of Man Whose Seed Impregnated My Mother)?  If you call him father, you are violating your own understanding of the Gospel.  If you call him dad, you are violating the spirit of your own understanding.  So what do you call him?  This is the problem with interpreting the Bible yourself and outside of Tradition, you interpret it however suits you.  When I was still a Protestant, earlier before I fell away from that falsehood, I had been extremely conservative and could justify each and every view I held with the Bible.  When I was closer to leaving, I was significantly more liberal, and could jsutify each and every view I held with the Bible.  When you interpret the Bible yourself, all you do is to transplant your own desires on to the words of the Apostles.  You do not interpret the Bible, but declare your own Gospel.  You create the Gospel of Me, and instead of 1 Peter and James, you have 1 Me, 2 Me, 3 Me, and so own (with one or two Epistles of I, and Letters of Myself).

There are countless reasons that you CAN call a priest father.  One example I have heard is that Christ was speaking in this passage of those false teachers who teach by their own authority and interpretation, essentially what you are doing.  So Christ is declaring that people that teach as you do are not to be called father or teacher.  However, when you teach on the authority of the Church, when you teach the Traditions of the Fathers, you have no reason to NOT be called father or teacher.
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
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,505


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #95 on: May 11, 2011, 03:28:57 PM »

If we argue Jesus was born from Mary's flesh & genetics, then Jesus would be sinful, because of Original sin.
1. "Jewishness" is passed on through the maternal line.

2. He took his flesh from Mary. He had the Virgin Mary's genetic line. If you believe he came through Mary but did not take flesh from her, then you are denying the term Theotokos and denying the truth of the incarnation. Intercourse with the Holy Spirit was not necessary for Christ to have taken his flesh from Mary.

If we argue Jesus was born from Mary's flesh & genetics, then Jesus would be sinful, because of Original sin.
That's like saying a transplanted liver becomes sick in a new body because the previous liver was not healthy. Jesus healed man's Original Sin by BECOMING incarnate, suffering in the flesh, dying on the Cross, and Rising on the third day. Christ healed human nature by uniting it to his divine nature in one undivided Person, the same Person of the Son, Word and Wisdom of God.

Orthodox also do not believe that Adam and Eve's Original Sin transmits guilt for that sin to all humanity. It transmits death, corruption, spiritual blindness and a disposition to sin, but not sinfulness itself. The Roman Catholcs DO believe all these things, and that is why they invented the Immaculate Conception doctrine.

Theotokos means "mother of God".   I don't deny that.
But I stand that her egg wasn't fertilized from God.
A mother is much more than a fertilized egg.
The lineage did work out anyway as the birth giver of the messiah.

You also hit something on the head.  If Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox don't agree on something such as original sin, and there are 1 billion plus RC's and 300 million plus EO - Then who is right?

As you can see CHURCHES have damaged my faith.  They don't agree on squat.  There are huge power grabs.  That's why you see me peeling this apart to lowest levels and not jumping on board with anything.

Jesus was Fully God ... AND..... FULLY HUMAN.

That means he has all the attributes of the people he was born into. His Mother was a Jew ( you agree, right?) so he was a Jew. He took his human nature from her, blood, genetics, appearance etc. just like all Humans.. Fully Human means Fully.

I am sorry you feel so confused and so victimized. Some people like be victims as a way to navigate through life... Stop it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYLMTvxOaeE
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,522



« Reply #96 on: May 11, 2011, 03:40:34 PM »

Yeshuaisiam, what do you think about the Council of Jerusalem bit? It seems to have been swallowed up in all the comments from different people throughout the thread, but it's been mentioned several times and is the critical evidence against the need for gentiles keeping Kosher.

I hope that you read the link I posted in the original.   I don't believe the council told people to stop eating Kosher.
"food" was not items that were not law.  For instance, a snake or hog was not food to the Jews at all.  Defiled "food" at idols, blood, was all obvious (of course except for the Eucharist).

The council of Jerusalem I also feels has some inconsistencies between Galations 2 and Acts.  I'm one who often challenges the writings of Luke, who obviously had an inconsistency of the thieves on the cross with the other synoptic gospels.  So in some ways I get sketchy with Acts.  This is important as those simple verses in Luke created a complex issue that we can be "saved on our death bed" which kind of circumvents Jacob's ladder.   The other gospels didn't speak of the thieves this way.  So which gospel do you believe?  Many say the Eastern Cross with the slanted bar reflects the story in the gospel of Luke, of course, it doesn't represent the other Gospels.  

Could the Eastern Orthodox cross itself be erroneous?  Matthew and Mark both said they insulted our Lord, yet Luke is pushed.  The Eastern Orthodox cross could represent that we think a thief who insulted Jesus went to heaven.

None the less, "we call it a council", but did they?
Do we want to trust things that came from councils 325 years later and on held by a started by a world leader (Constantine)?

What about Nazarite Christians?

Did Jesus teach worship on the Sabbath, or the 1st Day?

Do you believe that Jesus of Nazareth was really raised from the dead on the third day after being crucified as the Son of God and the Messiah in fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets?

Yes, I believe that Yeshua of Nazareth rose from the dead on the 3rd day after being crucified.  I believe he is the son of God, and the Messiah.  I believe he fulfilled the law of the prophets.

Do you believe that He ascended into heaven and sits at the right of the Father and will return again to judge the living and the dead?
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,505


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #97 on: May 11, 2011, 04:27:04 PM »

In all seriousness, I think there is a problem with your basic approach. You are listing various factoids and making comparisons and taking opinions and then re-listing mixing in your personal preferences and pet theories.

It's like being locked inside a pharmacy all night. You take off the shelf a little of this and a little of that and brew up a medicine cocktail. You figure"its all medicine' without the training to put the ingredients together. Then you end up poisoned and wonder why  

I think you should be asking just one or two very basic questions. The most important is simply an historical one. Is this Church the exact same Church founded by Christ and the Apostles on the day of Pentecost? You will have limited choices. Then submit yourself to them so you can learn how to practice sacramental Christianity.

Then show up each week and be transformed. Eventually you will be better able to resolve questions you have wondered about. It is a chicken or egg sort of thing.

Or remain a dilettante and show up to all kinds of Churches and ask all kinds of nit picky questions and point out seeming contradictions and get all the attention you want.

So I think you need to change course. Study the history of the Chruch and accept the proposition that the Ancient Church has teaching authority and then start showing up.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 04:27:20 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,441


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #98 on: May 11, 2011, 05:01:29 PM »

The question to me exists that if our GOD Jesus ate Kosher, and pigs, shellfish, rabbit, etc. he would not eat, shouldn't we?

By that logic, circumcision should be mandatory for Christians because the Lord was circumcised.

I am not asking you this to be flippant or inflammatory (I believe you ask good questions), but are you having the same dilemma over circumcision?

I think if you can get past the circumcision issue and really understand why circumcision is not required for gentile Christians, your questions about other Jewish practices, including dietary practices, will also be answered.

Can one sit in church doubting certain things and be worthy of you being in him, and him in you?

No-one is worthy. That is why we pray at every liturgy to be counted worthy by God's mercy and grace. The best prayer is "I believe, Lord, help my unbelief!".

Yes, I believe all Christians should be circumcised.   Our Lord was.
Then give up your car, buy a pair of sandals, and walk everywhere you need to go, because that's what Jesus did.
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,652


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #99 on: May 11, 2011, 08:25:45 PM »

If the phrase "Call no man father" really means "never use the word father again," what are you supposed to call a male parent?  Huh Come on. That verse has been taken out of context so often, it almost has tracks. People who quote that verse inevitably skip the one where Jesus refers to "Father Abraham" (Avraham Avinu or 'Abraham our father' still being a term of respect to this day among Orthodox Jews in reference to the prophet Abraham).  Roll Eyes
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,522



« Reply #100 on: May 11, 2011, 08:28:41 PM »

If the phrase "Call no man father" really means "never use the word father again," what are you supposed to call a male parent?  Huh Come on. That verse has been taken out of context so often, it almost has tracks. People who quote that verse inevitably skip the one where Jesus refers to "Father Abraham" (Avraham Avinu or 'Abraham our father' still being a term of respect to this day among Orthodox Jews in reference to the prophet Abraham).  Roll Eyes

Or where Christ asks "Why do you call me good?".
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   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 0.093 seconds with 39 queries.