OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 02, 2014, 01:06:15 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 5752 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« on: May 08, 2011, 10:58:15 PM »

I've done much research into Messianic Jews, and one thing my family practices now is to eat Kosher.  Of course, this is not commonly practiced by Eastern Orthodox Christians.

I'm needing help to personally refute articles like the one below.
http://www.lightofmashiach.org/kosher.html

These refutations help me to become "more Orthodox" and to help perhaps "unlearn" some things I have come across.

Such as "What did Jews consider food".
or
Are there any examples of very early church fathers eating foods that were not Kosher?

Thanks & God Bless

{Fixed thread title, nothing more - Fr. George, Global Mod}
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 03:07:57 PM by Fr. George » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2011, 11:15:03 PM »

Acts 15:7-30 (New King James Version)

And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
Then all the multitude kept silent and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring how many miracles and wonders God had worked through them among the Gentiles. And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written:

       ‘ After this I will return
      And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down;
      I will rebuild its ruins,
      And I will set it up;
      So that the rest of mankind may seek the LORD,
      Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
      Says the LORD who does all these things.’

“Known to God from eternity are all His works. Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”
  
Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren.
They wrote this, letter by them:

   The apostles, the elders, and the brethren,

   To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia:

   Greetings.

Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”—to whom we gave no such commandment— it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

    Farewell.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2011, 11:18:29 PM 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2011, 11:24:13 PM »

And yes, I believe Jesus did eat Kosher.
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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2011, 09:56:16 AM »

And yes, I believe Jesus did eat Kosher.

The quote from the scriptures really didn't answer the question.  The last part in particular didn't include all sins.
The link I provided is dealing with the issue specifically and St. Paul's dream.
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2011, 10:04:47 AM »

The quote from the scriptures really didn't answer the question.  The last part in particular didn't include all sins.
The link I provided is dealing with the issue specifically and St. Paul's dream.

*Peter's
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
pasadi97
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 572


« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2011, 10:11:38 AM »

The thing is this.

Noah laws applied to all normal people. Then Jews become people of God through circumcision and they obtained Old Law. They did not go 50%Noah law, 50% Moses Law or 70-30 or other combination. They went to 100 Old Law or Moses Law.

When Word of God came through baptism men become children of God. And they have obtained the NEW Law. Noah Law is not salvific neither Moses Law, thst is most people go to Hell even if respecting these laws. This is from wikipedia Sheol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol

"Sheol (pronounced "Sheh-ol"), in Hebrew שְׁאוֹל (She'ol), is the "grave", or "pit" or "abyss".[1][2]

In Judaism She'ol[3] is the earliest conception of the afterlife in the Jewish Scriptures. It is a place of darkness to which all dead go regardless of the moral choices made in life and where they are "removed from the light of God" (see the Book of Job).
"

So when people went to new law, as children of God you are supposed to follow 100% NEW LAW. Moses may have followed Noahide Law before he obtained Moses Law but afterward he went 100% with Moses Law.
After New Law, that is salvific, Christians follow 100% New Law. Why follow a Not salvific Law? TO get a change to go to Hell?

sad story is that Messianic Jews while are concerned with Kosher are not concerned with food for eternal life:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,35988.0.html
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 10:18:18 AM by pasadi97 » Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2011, 10:31:48 AM »

And yes, I believe Jesus did eat Kosher.

The quote from the scriptures really didn't answer the question.  The last part in particular didn't include all sins.
But it references the Law, and makes reference to what dietary restrictions gentiles are to follow.

And how they are less than what Jews had to follow.
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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,876



« Reply #7 on: May 09, 2011, 10:57:34 AM »

!המשיח קם
I've done much research into Messianic Jews, and one thing my family practices now is to eat Kosher.  Of course, this is not commonly practiced by Eastern Orthodox Christians.

I'm needing help to personally refute articles like the one below.
http://www.lightofmashiach.org/kosher.html

These refutations help me to become "more Orthodox" and to help perhaps "unlearn" some things I have come across.

Such as "What did Jews consider food".
or
Are there any examples of very early church fathers eating foods that were not Kosher?

Thanks & God Bless
Unless you all are sons of Jacob, there's no reason for you to go Kosher.

As pointed out, all the gentile early Church Father ate non-kosher food.
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
pasadi97
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 572


« Reply #8 on: May 09, 2011, 11:01:16 AM »

If you have become Children of God through baptism, there is no reason to eat Kosher that is for people of God aka under the children of God. Your team, your people at work are under your children, right?
JN 1:12 But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to

become God's children,

to those who believe in his name:

See Christians can call God Our Father, sons of Jacob not baptised can call God Master. There is a book that say not receiving Jesus is a sin, and people may not be able to be righteous after Jesus comming without accepting Jesus, that is Word of God. Not accepting Jesus even with eating Kosher might be a sin.


In Heaven, the House of God go the Children of God. This is why King David and Adam and Abraham had to be baptised, to become children of God before entering Heaven.

Entire story here: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,35988.0.html

This is Jeremiah saying A NEW COVENANT, that probably is 100% NEW, that probably is without KOSHER:
JER 31:31 Behold, the days come, says Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
JER 31:32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Yahweh.
JER 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says Yahweh: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:
JER 31:34 and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Yahweh; for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says Yahweh: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.


The thing is this.

Noah laws applied to all normal people. Then Jews become people of God through circumcision and they obtained Old Law. They did not go 50%Noah law, 50% Moses Law or 70-30 or other combination. They went to 100 Old Law or Moses Law.

When Word of God came through baptism men become children of God. And they have obtained the NEW Law. Noah Law is not salvific neither Moses Law, thst is most people go to Hell even if respecting these laws. This is from wikipedia Sheol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol

"Sheol (pronounced "Sheh-ol"), in Hebrew שְׁאוֹל (She'ol), is the "grave", or "pit" or "abyss".[1][2]

In Judaism She'ol[3] is the earliest conception of the afterlife in the Jewish Scriptures. It is a place of darkness to which all dead go regardless of the moral choices made in life and where they are "removed from the light of God" (see the Book of Job).
"

So when people went to new law, as children of God you are supposed to follow 100% NEW LAW. Moses may have followed Noahide Law before he obtained Moses Law but afterward he went 100% with Moses Law.
After New Law, that is salvific, Christians follow 100% New Law. Why follow a Not salvific Law? TO get a change to go to Hell?

sad story is that Messianic Jews while are concerned with Kosher are not concerned with food for eternal life:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,35988.0.html
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 11:25:45 AM by pasadi97 » Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2011, 11:39:18 AM »

Their insistence on using "hebrew/aramaic" words and phrases, not saying the word "God", and the entire fetishized anachronism, though done with the best of intentions, just seems like...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wngLcvB-8uM
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 11:39:28 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,970


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #10 on: May 09, 2011, 01:39:51 PM »

Biblical or rabbinical kosher?
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #11 on: May 09, 2011, 02:28:19 PM »

Just an observation, the kosher laws were delivered on Mt Sinai when God set the Jews apart for Himself, and the apostles, under divine inspiration, abolished them as a requirement when the Church started receiving the gentiles. It seems those laws in particular had to do with dividing the Jews from the gentiles, and as soon as Jews and gentiles were united together in Christ, the laws that had previously divided them were no longer effective because the division that they maintained was united in Christ. With the division between Jew and gentile gone, the laws that divided them were no longer necessary and became contrary to Christian unity.

Yes, I believe that as a Jew fulfilling the Law, Jesus did eat Kosher.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 02:30:00 PM by Melodist » 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: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #12 on: May 09, 2011, 02:41:50 PM »

!המשיח קם
I've done much research into Messianic Jews, and one thing my family practices now is to eat Kosher.  Of course, this is not commonly practiced by Eastern Orthodox Christians.

I'm needing help to personally refute articles like the one below.
http://www.lightofmashiach.org/kosher.html

These refutations help me to become "more Orthodox" and to help perhaps "unlearn" some things I have come across.

Such as "What did Jews consider food".
or
Are there any examples of very early church fathers eating foods that were not Kosher?

Thanks & God Bless
Unless you all are sons of Jacob, there's no reason for you to go Kosher.

As pointed out, all the gentile early Church Father ate non-kosher food.

Does that mean that I should start eating Kosher, being a Jew who converted?

I sure hope not.  Been there.

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2011, 02:46:32 PM »

Just an observation, the kosher laws were delivered on Mt Sinai when God set the Jews apart for Himself, and the apostles, under divine inspiration, abolished them as a requirement when the Church started receiving the gentiles. It seems those laws in particular had to do with dividing the Jews from the gentiles, and as soon as Jews and gentiles were united together in Christ, the laws that had previously divided them were no longer effective because the division that they maintained was united in Christ. With the division between Jew and gentile gone, the laws that divided them were no longer necessary and became contrary to Christian unity.

Yes, I believe that as a Jew fulfilling the Law, Jesus did eat Kosher.

Yes, it's pretty unlikely he would prefer unclean foods and not have it recorded.  His admonitions against the form of Phariseeism dominant in his time were still part of a well known minority viewpoint. Eating bad food would have been well beyond the pale. 

"I'll have the Lobster please and ummmmmmmmmmmm..and a fresh glass of goat milk."

I think not
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,041



WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2011, 02:48:52 PM »


I actually know a few Christians who celebrate the Jewish holidays - Passover, etc....

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,981


black metal cat


« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2011, 03:09:33 PM »

Jesus might have ate his meals with prostitutes, accessories to murder, and all sorts of other sinners, but ain't no way he didn't keep kosher!  Wink  Not saying that the question of the conduct of Christians as it relates to dietary rules doesn't have some validity, I'm just not totally sure how it fits into the overall message and life Jesus led, and the message the Apostles preached... then again, there are certainly dietary customs in the Church still...
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2011, 04:24:17 PM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
Logged

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

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 09, 2011, 04:38:34 PM »

In the BIBLE it is written that the dread was from GOD. Isn't that enough for you or are Acts not enough kosher to you?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #18 on: May 09, 2011, 04:38:45 PM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
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 #19 on: May 09, 2011, 06:08:15 PM »

Yeshuaisiam,

If Jewish dietary practice is important to Christian life, why are we not lobbying the government to rebuild the Temple so we can immediately commence animal sacrifices?

Are we are bound by the old covenant or we are not? It's a big theological question that will answer your much smaller question re Jewish dietary law if you're able to answer it.
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: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #20 on: May 09, 2011, 06:24:31 PM »

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
The Council of Jerusalem was not Peter's dream.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 06:24:55 PM 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #21 on: May 09, 2011, 06:55:35 PM »

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
The Council of Jerusalem was not Peter's dream.

Yeah. The Church collectively decided to end the kosher rules.

And the dream was not really about eating kosher anyway. The dream was to get St Peter to stop judging the Gentiles.
Logged
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 #22 on: May 09, 2011, 07:37:05 PM »

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
The Council of Jerusalem was not Peter's dream.

Yeah. The Church collectively decided to end the kosher rules.

And the dream was not really about eating kosher anyway. The dream was to get St Peter to stop judging the Gentiles.

I'm not sure how theologically correct this opinion is, but I'm of the view that, although the council of Jerusalem settled the manner definitively, Christ himself put an end to the kosher laws when he said "drink from this, all of you, this is my blood of the new covenant".

The old covenant was not given to those of us who are gentiles. Our relationship with God springs from Christ's shed blood, not the promises of Abraham and the Law of Moses.

While saying nothing of whether the old covenant continues in force for Jews, I would argue that gentile Christians are certainly not bound by its terms.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #23 on: May 09, 2011, 08:20:28 PM »

Jesus probably ate kosher, but as pointed out, by commanding us to eat his body and drink his blood that went right out the window.


I seem to recall a verse, and I forget it right now, so take this with a grain of salt, which says not to follow those who tell you what to eat.
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #24 on: May 09, 2011, 09:46:05 PM »

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
The Council of Jerusalem was not Peter's dream.

Yeah. The Church collectively decided to end the kosher rules.

And the dream was not really about eating kosher anyway. The dream was to get St Peter to stop judging the Gentiles.

I'm not sure how theologically correct this opinion is, but I'm of the view that, although the council of Jerusalem settled the manner definitively, Christ himself put an end to the kosher laws when he said "drink from this, all of you, this is my blood of the new covenant".

The old covenant was not given to those of us who are gentiles. Our relationship with God springs from Christ's shed blood, not the promises of Abraham and the Law of Moses.

While saying nothing of whether the old covenant continues in force for Jews, I would argue that gentile Christians are certainly not bound by its terms.

I understand exactly what you are saying Akimori Makoto.   But that brings up confusion back to the Eucharist thread the other day where you gave me EXCELLENT references to church fathers.

"drink from this, all of you, this is my blood of the new covenant"
and
Acts 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

So if the Eucharist is blood, we are also told in acts to not drink blood, and blood is of course against Kosher.
But obviously the church fathers believed drinking the blood of Christ is okay.

Of course I understand God could have an exemption to the Eucharist. (Is this proper Orthodox think?)

Arg, I'm confused.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Kasatkin fan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Archdiocese of Canada
Posts: 636



« Reply #25 on: May 09, 2011, 10:01:34 PM »

Arg, I'm confused.

If the retention of Jewish law was required for salvation (and remember eating Kosher is only a small part of that), then the true Church died out long ago. There have been Christians attracted to Jewish practices for almost all of the history of the Church. It is why St. John Chrysostom forbade living by Jewish law, it leads to confussion.

The Messianic Jews themselves are part of a 40 year old movement. They have grown out of syncratism between the modern varient of Pharisitic Judaism, and Protestant Christianity. They have no claims to the legitimacy of early Christianity or the Judaism that preceeded it.
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #26 on: May 09, 2011, 10:03:04 PM »

In the BIBLE it is written that the dread was from GOD. Isn't that enough for you or are Acts not enough kosher to you?

The book of Acts was written by St. Luke, who was a follower of St. Paul, who also was the only NT author that had a different story of the thieves next to our Lord and Savior.  His version spoke of the one thief "being saved".   The other books just say the thieves insulted him.  

So yes, I believe that there can be inconsistencies in the bible.  

However, I do believe that Luke is genuine (slang of Kosher) as well as Acts.  They are genuine books and I consider them 99.9% right.  But the quote from Acts 15:29 (I posted above) "seems" to create a confusing paradox with the Eucharist.  Our God tells us to "drink his blood" in many places, but Acts 15:29 says not to drink blood.  

It's confusing me because "food to a Jew" that was "made clean" would not be things like shellfish or bugs, because they are not considered food to a Jew.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
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 #27 on: May 09, 2011, 10:14:54 PM »

So if the Eucharist is blood, we are also told in acts to not drink blood, and blood is of course against Kosher.
But obviously the church fathers believed drinking the blood of Christ is okay.

Of course I understand God could have an exemption to the Eucharist. (Is this proper Orthodox think?)

Arg, I'm confused.

Obviously, I do not know the mind of God, but just recall what happened in the sixth chapter of John's gospel: the Jews were horrified at the idea of drinking the Lord's blood, probably because drinking blood was so strongly condemned in the Hebrew scriptures. Nevertheless, the Lord didn't tell them he was speaking symbolically -- he told them to get over it and drink his blood already.

So, whatever we are meant to observe about drinking blood generally (I'm not bold enough to say I have the answers!), this much is certain -- the Eucharist is exceptional.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 10:16:01 PM by akimori makoto » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #28 on: May 09, 2011, 10:17:29 PM »

Arg, I'm confused.

If the retention of Jewish law was required for salvation (and remember eating Kosher is only a small part of that), then the true Church died out long ago. There have been Christians attracted to Jewish practices for almost all of the history of the Church. It is why St. John Chrysostom forbade living by Jewish law, it leads to confussion.

The Messianic Jews themselves are part of a 40 year old movement. They have grown out of syncratism between the modern varient of Pharisitic Judaism, and Protestant Christianity. They have no claims to the legitimacy of early Christianity or the Judaism that preceeded it.

The history of Messianic Jews does matter, however, their time may be short but does this make somebody wrong?  If we can't overly prove the errors of their specific arguments I wouldn't see their history as important as what they are saying.

The question to me exists that if our GOD Jesus ate Kosher, and pigs, shellfish, rabbit, etc. he would not eat, shouldn't we?
I can't find one place where an EARLY church father at non-Kosher.

John the Baptist at Locusts and Honey.  Locusts being the only invertebrate that is Kosher.  

I'm just searching for examples of non-Kosher eating because I feel the Messianic Jews make a good point on the original post link that I listed.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 13,659


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #29 on: May 09, 2011, 10:21:34 PM »

I am just guessing, but I think Jesus may have had a difficult time *not* eating kosher- he grew up in a Jewish environment. It's not like there were a lot of ham and cheese sandwiches at the corner stand.   Embarrassed
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/
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #30 on: May 09, 2011, 10:22:20 PM »

So if the Eucharist is blood, we are also told in acts to not drink blood, and blood is of course against Kosher.
But obviously the church fathers believed drinking the blood of Christ is okay.

Of course I understand God could have an exemption to the Eucharist. (Is this proper Orthodox think?)

Arg, I'm confused.

Obviously, I do not know the mind of God, but just recall what happened in the sixth chapter of John's gospel: the Jews were horrified at the idea of drinking the Lord's blood, probably because drinking blood was so strongly condemned in the Hebrew scriptures. Nevertheless, the Lord didn't tell them he was speaking symbolically -- he told them to get over it and drink his blood already.

So, whatever we are meant to observe about drinking blood generally (I'm not bold enough to say I have the answers!), this much is certain -- the Eucharist is exceptional.

Thanks.  I agree it must be exceptional.  I mean its is "exceptional"  Wink.   Also his flesh, and people of course aren't Kosher.

Sometimes I wonder if I should just try to stop making "logic" out of all of it, hope the church got it right through all these years and just accept it.  It's blind and I may never know the truth about everything or everything may not make sense...  I don't know if I'm worthy of his flesh or blood.

Can one sit in church doubting certain things and be worthy of you being in him, and him in you?
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: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #31 on: May 09, 2011, 10:24:49 PM »

I am just guessing, but I think Jesus may have had a difficult time *not* eating kosher- he grew up in a Jewish environment. It's not like there were a lot of ham and cheese sandwiches at the corner stand.   Embarrassed

LOL.   Grin

Well of course there were bugs, snakes, rabbits, varmits etc.   LOL, but I know what you mean.  Not many Rabbinical oyster bars in the neighborhood.  Plus people watching/judging? - I assume.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
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 #32 on: May 09, 2011, 10:26:01 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!".
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #33 on: May 09, 2011, 11:18:27 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.
I wonder if this is part of "taking up our crosses and following him".
I may not get my head around all this, but may just have to "accept it".

Thanks for your great responses Akimori Makoto
 
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
pasadi97
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 572


« Reply #34 on: May 09, 2011, 11:26:25 PM »

Circumcision = flesh belongs to God.
Baptism= flesh plus soul belongs to God.

JER 31:33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says Yahweh: I will put my law in their inward parts,

and in their heart will I write it;

and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:

see, the law will be written in heart that connects body and soul so it will affect soul => flesh plus soul belongs to God.

Moses respected Nohide laws before receiving Old Law or Moses Law. after that nobody was interested about Noahide laws. same here. You become child of God with everything of New Law.

There are 3 categories of people:
Normal people obeying Noahide laws. They go probably to Hell.
People of God obeying Laws of Moses.They go probably to Hell.
Children of God obeying laws of New Law. They can go to Heaven.

People not understanding not having the abc of eternal life and picking from one or another law as they see fit. Hopefully they will pick most from New Law.

Yeshuisiam I like your name.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2011, 11:31:48 PM by pasadi97 » Logged
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 #35 on: May 09, 2011, 11:33:47 PM »

Thanks for your great responses Akimori Makoto

No worries, my friend.

I think you've opened a can of worms with that statement on circumcision, hahah.

I also like your name a lot.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Saint Iaint
This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Once Delivered
Posts: 625


The Truth Shall Be Reviled


WWW
« Reply #36 on: May 10, 2011, 01:14:55 AM »

There is no such thing as a 'Gentile' Christian.

There is Israel - which is the Church.

There are 'Jews' - which reject the Church.

It seems to me that 'Gentiles' is something of a made-up word... which originally meant simply 'nations', sometimes referring to those nations which did not know the One True God; the God of all Israel, Who we know is Jesus Christ.

So a Christian cannot be a 'Gentile'.

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

As for 'Kosher'...

What is 'Kosher'? Where can I find 'Kosher' in the Bible?

Through influence in the media the word 'Kosher' has become part of everyday American vocabulary.

In using the word now, it is used as the Jews use it... as if it signifies a good thing.

But if to keep Kosher means to attempt to keep the Law... then from a Christian point of view it's not a good thing because the law is death.

"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death."
- Romans 8:2


†IC XC†
†NI KA†


Logged

Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #37 on: May 10, 2011, 01:38:36 AM »

So if the Eucharist is blood, we are also told in acts to not drink blood, and blood is of course against Kosher.
But obviously the church fathers believed drinking the blood of Christ is okay.

Of course I understand God could have an exemption to the Eucharist. (Is this proper Orthodox think?)

Arg, I'm confused.

From the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom:

Quote
Accept our supplications, O God; make us worthy to offer unto thee prayers and supplications, and unbloody sacrifices for all thy people.

Quote
Again we offer unto thee this rational [noetic?] and unbloody worship, and we call upon thee and pray thee, and supplicate thee: send down thy Holy Spirit upon us and upon these Gifts set forth...

And make this bread the precious Body of thy Christ.
Amen.
And again the deacon: Bless, Father, the holy cup. And the priest blessing, says:
Amen.
And that which is in this cup the precious Blood of thy Christ.
Amen.

Did that make it more confusing, or more clear?  Cheesy

Yes, I believe all Christians should be circumcised.   Our Lord was.
But this directly contradicts the conciliar Decree of the Apostles at the Council of Jerusalem.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 01:41:08 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,312

"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #38 on: May 10, 2011, 02:04:48 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?


Peter's dream was a revelation that Gentiles would also be included in the New Covenant. Yes, it was also a revelation that salvation is not predicated upon what we eat or drink. However, as Christians, we have a moral repsonsibility to respect our earth, to respect our bodies, to respect God's creatures, and to love our neighbors. Therefore, we should consider the physical, social, moral, and spiritual consequences of what we eat. It may be permissable to eat animals, but it is not permissable to torture them. So I would argue that a Kosher diet may be more Christian than a non-Kosher diet. Of course, I would also argue that a vegetarian diet is preferable to a Kosher diet.

Just my opinion.


Selam
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 02:05:37 AM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"Those who have nothing constructive to offer are masters at belittling the offerings of others." +GMK+
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #39 on: May 10, 2011, 04:52:14 AM »

Did Jesus eat Kosher food?

The answer to this question is the same as the answer given to the following question:

Was Jesus circumcised?
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #40 on: May 10, 2011, 07:50:33 AM »

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
The Council of Jerusalem was not Peter's dream.

Yeah. The Church collectively decided to end the kosher rules.

And the dream was not really about eating kosher anyway. The dream was to get St Peter to stop judging the Gentiles.

I'm not sure how theologically correct this opinion is, but I'm of the view that, although the council of Jerusalem settled the manner definitively, Christ himself put an end to the kosher laws when he said "drink from this, all of you, this is my blood of the new covenant".

The old covenant was not given to those of us who are gentiles. Our relationship with God springs from Christ's shed blood, not the promises of Abraham and the Law of Moses.

While saying nothing of whether the old covenant continues in force for Jews, I would argue that gentile Christians are certainly not bound by its terms.

I understand exactly what you are saying Akimori Makoto.   But that brings up confusion back to the Eucharist thread the other day where you gave me EXCELLENT references to church fathers.

"drink from this, all of you, this is my blood of the new covenant"
and
Acts 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

So if the Eucharist is blood, we are also told in acts to not drink blood, and blood is of course against Kosher.
But obviously the church fathers believed drinking the blood of Christ is okay.

Of course I understand God could have an exemption to the Eucharist. (Is this proper Orthodox think?)

Arg, I'm confused.

Not exactly. They believed drinking blood in the form or wine was okay. .
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,482


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #41 on: May 10, 2011, 08:36:25 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.
Logged
SubdeaconDavid
"...the spread of the light of Orthodoxy among the peoples of all the lands where our Church exists continues as an inseparable part of our mission": Metropolitan Hilarion, First Hierarch of ROCOR
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR)
Posts: 504


Помилуй мя Боже, по велицей милости Твоей


WWW
« Reply #42 on: May 10, 2011, 09:23:18 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?


Peter's dream was a revelation that Gentiles would also be included in the New Covenant. Yes, it was also a revelation that salvation is not predicated upon what we eat or drink. However, as Christians, we have a moral repsonsibility to respect our earth, to respect our bodies, to respect God's creatures, and to love our neighbors. Therefore, we should consider the physical, social, moral, and spiritual consequences of what we eat. It may be permissable to eat animals, but it is not permissable to torture them. So I would argue that a Kosher diet may be more Christian than a non-Kosher diet. Of course, I would also argue that a vegetarian diet is preferable to a Kosher diet.
While meat eating is permitted, I read into the fasts not just fasting as a discipline, as a form of austerity, but see the dietary prescriptions as helping open us out to a new enhanced connection with God.  If we are not slaughtering animals we are being more compassionate, treading lighter on the planet, and compassion is always better than passion.
Logged

Visit my blog@  http://orthodoxtasmania.blogspot.com

To the Russians abroad it has been granted to shine in the whole world  the light of Orthodoxy, so that other peoples, seeing their good deeds, might glorify our Father in Heaven, and thus obtain salvation
S John of Shanghai & San Francisco
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,876



« Reply #43 on: May 10, 2011, 09:43:46 AM »

!המשיח קם
Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
You have the problem that that dream is recorded in Scripture. That should settle the matter.  Then there is the Gospel where Christ says it is what passes out of a man that is unclean "thereby declaring all foods pure."

Christ was constantly violating the Sabbath and was crucified, literally, for that, but "the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."  He having fulfilled the Law, us holding to the Law to save in spite of that means to crucify Him again.
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
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,482


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #44 on: May 10, 2011, 09:57:07 AM »

!המשיח קם
Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?
You have the problem that that dream is recorded in Scripture. That should settle the matter.  Then there is the Gospel where Christ says it is what passes out of a man that is unclean "thereby declaring all foods pure."

Christ was constantly violating the Sabbath and was crucified, literally, for that, but "the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."  He having fulfilled the Law, us holding to the Law to save in spite of that means to crucify Him again.

Absolutely agreed!

It never ceases to amaze me how subjects that were, or should have been, taught to us in Basic Orthodox Catechisim come up over and over again from both 'cradles' and 'converts'. What is more interesting is that many seem to proclaim their own 'interpretations' of Scripture or the Holy Canons or Holy Tradition in ways that are at best inconsistent with the accepted teachings of Orthodoxy - be they 'world' or otherwise.

I keep reading a common response to questions which begin something like 'What is the teaching of Orthodoxy on this or that' and many seem to reply, 'well, we really don't have a definitive position like the Romans etc....' On most of the important doctrines and teachings of our Faith this is simply not true.

« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 09:59:51 AM by podkarpatska » Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #45 on: May 10, 2011, 10:13:14 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?


Peter's dream was a revelation that Gentiles would also be included in the New Covenant. Yes, it was also a revelation that salvation is not predicated upon what we eat or drink. However, as Christians, we have a moral repsonsibility to respect our earth, to respect our bodies, to respect God's creatures, and to love our neighbors. Therefore, we should consider the physical, social, moral, and spiritual consequences of what we eat. It may be permissable to eat animals, but it is not permissable to torture them. So I would argue that a Kosher diet may be more Christian than a non-Kosher diet. Of course, I would also argue that a vegetarian diet is preferable to a Kosher diet.

Just my opinion.


Selam


The trouble I have with Peter's dream is on 2 levels.

1) It was a dream.  I would "think" God would be more clear and state this on Earth if he wanted to eradicate Kosher law.  Though our Savior was announced in a dream to Joseph, that was to "calm him down" and to one man.   To change Kosher law I would think would be more direct than announced in 1 mans dream.  I may have to duck on this one, but this is one reason people condemn Mormonism, because it was literally witnessed by 1 man Joseph Smith.  Though of course, St. Peter had directness with Christ, the testimony of the dream was written by Luke.  So basically all of Kosher food laws were eradicated by a dream.

2) The argument presented in the link that all "food" was made clean.  Worms, rabbit, snake, pigs, or catfish was not "food" to a Jew.  However issues like cheese on meat could be resolved with this. (cheeseburger forbidden to Jews because of Molech worship of boiling children in their mother's milk in sacrifice)

I also agree that eating Kosher is much more healthy.  Pigs/pork is one of the most parasite filled meats, and a pig eats its own fecal matter.   Catfish are bottom dwellers, eating the "trash" of freshwater bodies of water & bird dung.  Shrimp is basically the cockroach of the sea.  Crabs are also bottom dwellers eating the trash like catfish.  If you only ate rabbit meat you would starve to death over a month long period because its too lean to keep you alive.  Shellfish lurk on the bottom as well, eating many scraps of the ocean.

So yes, Kosher absolutely still makes sense health wise.   Our body is the Holy temple.

I also agree with you on eating vegetarian.  Truthfully Raw vegetarian I feel is the best with combinations of super foods for health.


A bit off topic but - check out these two videos of this woman's transformation - namely the 2nd one after she's done this for a while.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk4sw_rYucg
then
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HESWMoMNcRw&feature=related
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: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #46 on: May 10, 2011, 10:24:05 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.

Passover = Pascha
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,876



« Reply #47 on: May 10, 2011, 10:32:20 AM »

!המשיח קם

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday
No, St. Ignatios already speaks about the Jews abandoning the Sabbath for the Lord's Day.
Quote
Passover = Pascha

Indeed, which was April 24, not April 19th. And always on Sunday ever since its fulfillment.
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
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #48 on: May 10, 2011, 10:34:05 AM »

In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.
Constantine made Sunday a secular no-work day, but Sunday worship was universal before that afaik. That's not to say that people didn't keep Saturday in some way in addition to Sunday.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 10:34:23 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #49 on: May 10, 2011, 10:34:43 AM »

1) It was a dream.  I would "think" God would be more clear and state this on Earth if he wanted to eradicate Kosher law.  Though our Savior was announced in a dream to Joseph, that was to "calm him down" and to one man.   To change Kosher law I would think would be more direct than announced in 1 mans dream.  I may have to duck on this one, but this is one reason people condemn Mormonism, because it was literally witnessed by 1 man Joseph Smith.  Though of course, St. Peter had directness with Christ, the testimony of the dream was written by Luke.  So basically all of Kosher food laws were eradicated by a dream.

I think this has been addressed several times in this thread already. The doing-away with kosher is based on the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15, not St Peter's dream in Acts 10. That was an action of the entire Church, thus infallible. It's not based on some random dream.

The dream was not primarily about food. The main point was a private revelation to St Peter so he would accept Gentiles as equals in Christianity, so he would receive Cornelius into the Church.

2) The argument presented in the link that all "food" was made clean.  Worms, rabbit, snake, pigs, or catfish was not "food" to a Jew.  However issues like cheese on meat could be resolved with this. (cheeseburger forbidden to Jews because of Molech worship of boiling children in their mother's milk in sacrifice)

Christ declared all food was clean.

So He said to them, “Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods? (Mark 7:18-19 NKJV)

Or as the NIV renders it:

For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

I think we would need some more evidence to prove that the Jews did not consider unclean foods to not be foods at all. I think the very concept of prahok (Cambodian fermented fish) is repulsive, and I could go to every restaurant in my area and not find it available. That doesn't mean it's not food. Same with the Jews: they wouldn't eat rabbit, but there's no evidence they don't consider it food. It's unclean food.

I also agree that eating Kosher is much more healthy.  Pigs/pork is one of the most parasite filled meats, and a pig eats its own fecal matter.   Catfish are bottom dwellers, eating the "trash" of freshwater bodies of water & bird dung.  Shrimp is basically the cockroach of the sea.  Crabs are also bottom dwellers eating the trash like catfish.  If you only ate rabbit meat you would starve to death over a month long period because its too lean to keep you alive.  Shellfish lurk on the bottom as well, eating many scraps of the ocean.

So yes, Kosher absolutely still makes sense health wise.   Our body is the Holy temple.

I also agree with you on eating vegetarian.  Truthfully Raw vegetarian I feel is the best with combinations of super foods for health.

That's fine. I know Orthodox people who are vegans. But they are not vegans because they are kosher or believe foods are ritually unclean, nor may they judge others who eat meat or other foods they find to be unhealthful.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 10:44:41 AM by bogdan » Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #50 on: May 10, 2011, 11:12:14 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..


Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Uh oh... I go home for the Passover which memorializes an historic event. If my parents were not still alive, I would not go.

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #51 on: May 10, 2011, 11:14:45 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.

Passover = Pascha


I think you are heading down the wrong track in general. You seem to be taking a little from here and a little from there a dash from Armenia a scoop from Russia and then I suppose you will cobble something together of your own liking.

If you are attracted to the Orthodox Church then submit yourself to her. If you are drawn to the OO  no one here would object. But it is not part of the Orthodox Mind-Set to pick and choose and sew something together. The danger is that you will just pick things that will help you remain within your own personal comfort zone. Real Orthodoxy is much more about obedience and getting past yourself.



Hope this helps
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 11:21:46 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,482


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #52 on: May 10, 2011, 11:45:38 AM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.

Passover = Pascha


I think you are heading down the wrong track in general. You seem to be taking a little from here and a little from there a dash from Armenia a scoop from Russia and then I suppose you will cobble something together of your own liking.

If you are attracted to the Orthodox Church then submit yourself to her. If you are drawn to the OO  no one here would object. But it is not part of the Orthodox Mind-Set to pick and choose and sew something together. The danger is that you will just pick things that will help you remain within your own personal comfort zone. Real Orthodoxy is much more about obedience and getting past yourself.



Hope this helps

Another way of looking at it is that small (t) traditions may usually be found at the salad bar, but the rest of the menu, i.e. the entrees (Big T)  are set in stone.
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #53 on: May 10, 2011, 12:56:10 PM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.

Passover = Pascha


I think you are heading down the wrong track in general. You seem to be taking a little from here and a little from there a dash from Armenia a scoop from Russia and then I suppose you will cobble something together of your own liking.

If you are attracted to the Orthodox Church then submit yourself to her. If you are drawn to the OO  no one here would object. But it is not part of the Orthodox Mind-Set to pick and choose and sew something together. The danger is that you will just pick things that will help you remain within your own personal comfort zone. Real Orthodoxy is much more about obedience and getting past yourself.



Hope this helps

You may be right.

The question I have for you is it obedience to the church, or obedience to God?  I'm asking these questions because I am not positive the church obeys God.  I ask questions because I want to know how certain church beliefs came to exist.  For instance, the iconostasis and the separation between Earth and Heaven (another thread).  It was never answered but I did take some ridicule for dare questioning the origination (ie I'm ruining the beauty of the chruch).  The same goes for the controversies within the church itself (Why OO, EO, RC, Ecumenism, iconoclasts, Aryans).  Who's right?  Which obedience do I "submit to".   That is why I am trying to get CRYSTAL CLEAR explanations before I submit to anything that calls itself the true church.  I want to worship God in Orthodoxy as defined - the right way.   

That's what is hard for people to answer, because frankly many don't know.  They just "submit" and don't care about the principals of what they submit to because of what their particular "jurisdiction" believes.  That's why we have those that are EO, OO, RC, Protestant, Anabaptist, pro ecumenism, anti ecumenism, iconoclasts.... the list goes on.  People submit and get afraid to ask questions or challenge the legitimacy of the councils themselves, saints, or ecumenical patriarchs.

In other words I want to do the right thing, and I'm seeking out Orthodox apologetics, not to blindly submit.
I'll submit to the "church" when I know its the right church.  I'm all ears when it makes sense.



Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,482


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #54 on: May 10, 2011, 01:37:15 PM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.

Passover = Pascha


I think you are heading down the wrong track in general. You seem to be taking a little from here and a little from there a dash from Armenia a scoop from Russia and then I suppose you will cobble something together of your own liking.

If you are attracted to the Orthodox Church then submit yourself to her. If you are drawn to the OO  no one here would object. But it is not part of the Orthodox Mind-Set to pick and choose and sew something together. The danger is that you will just pick things that will help you remain within your own personal comfort zone. Real Orthodoxy is much more about obedience and getting past yourself.



Hope this helps

You may be right.

The question I have for you is it obedience to the church, or obedience to God?  I'm asking these questions because I am not positive the church obeys God.  I ask questions because I want to know how certain church beliefs came to exist.  For instance, the iconostasis and the separation between Earth and Heaven (another thread).  It was never answered but I did take some ridicule for dare questioning the origination (ie I'm ruining the beauty of the chruch).  The same goes for the controversies within the church itself (Why OO, EO, RC, Ecumenism, iconoclasts, Aryans).  Who's right?  Which obedience do I "submit to".   That is why I am trying to get CRYSTAL CLEAR explanations before I submit to anything that calls itself the true church.  I want to worship God in Orthodoxy as defined - the right way.   

That's what is hard for people to answer, because frankly many don't know.  They just "submit" and don't care about the principals of what they submit to because of what their particular "jurisdiction" believes.  That's why we have those that are EO, OO, RC, Protestant, Anabaptist, pro ecumenism, anti ecumenism, iconoclasts.... the list goes on.  People submit and get afraid to ask questions or challenge the legitimacy of the councils themselves, saints, or ecumenical patriarchs.

In other words I want to do the right thing, and I'm seeking out Orthodox apologetics, not to blindly submit.
I'll submit to the "church" when I know its the right church.  I'm all ears when it makes sense.





That's fine, but then you ought not to describe yourself as "Eastern Orthodox' in your profile in that by your own admission, you do not accept or understand the dogmatic teachings of the Church. Perhaps you should identify yourself as being something like 'searcher.' Seems to me that Tolstoy had similar problems in the 19th century and he finally stopped attempting to identify himself as being Orthodox.
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #55 on: May 10, 2011, 03:02:34 PM »

Okay I changed it for more clarity.  I suppose I feel more Eastern Orthodox, but perhaps I'm not?  I don't know.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,482


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #56 on: May 10, 2011, 03:10:20 PM »

Okay I changed it for more clarity.  I suppose I feel more Eastern Orthodox, but perhaps I'm not?  I don't know.

Now, that being said, I pray that your search and journey will lead you to the fullness of the Faith and God's saving Grace, through the Orthodox Church! Many years!
Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #57 on: May 10, 2011, 05:15:42 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.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 05:16:05 PM 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
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 #58 on: May 10, 2011, 05:57:44 PM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #59 on: May 10, 2011, 05:59:18 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?
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #60 on: May 10, 2011, 05:59:24 PM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.
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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #61 on: May 10, 2011, 06:01:59 PM »

Just out of curiosity,

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

I suppose in sheer wonder if it's right to change this entire law over a dream of St. PETER.  I understand dreams can be inspired by God, but if God himself ate Kosher do we allow a dream to change this?

If our God and Savior Jesus Christ ate Kosher as a man here on Earth, and he is our example, wouldn't we want to follow that?

Nope..

I don't wear sandals or sack cloth either. Nor do I go to Synagogue or ritually wash my hands before eating. I also observe Sunday as my day of worship rather than Saturday..

Or for that matter observe the Jewish Passover.

Well also remember that some here would argue about Sunday worship, since many argue the 1st day the Apostles were actually celebrating the passover.  Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it's Armenian Orthodox worship on the Sabbath.  In fact I believe many churches in the "Holy Catholic Apostolic Church" celebrated worship on 7th day (Sabbath / Saturday).  St. Constantine officially made it Sunday.

Passover = Pascha


I think you are heading down the wrong track in general. You seem to be taking a little from here and a little from there a dash from Armenia a scoop from Russia and then I suppose you will cobble something together of your own liking.

If you are attracted to the Orthodox Church then submit yourself to her. If you are drawn to the OO  no one here would object. But it is not part of the Orthodox Mind-Set to pick and choose and sew something together. The danger is that you will just pick things that will help you remain within your own personal comfort zone. Real Orthodoxy is much more about obedience and getting past yourself.



Hope this helps

You may be right.

The question I have for you is it obedience to the church, or obedience to God?  I'm asking these questions because I am not positive the church obeys God.  I ask questions because I want to know how certain church beliefs came to exist.  For instance, the iconostasis and the separation between Earth and Heaven (another thread).  It was never answered but I did take some ridicule for dare questioning the origination (ie I'm ruining the beauty of the chruch).  The same goes for the controversies within the church itself (Why OO, EO, RC, Ecumenism, iconoclasts, Aryans).  Who's right?  Which obedience do I "submit to".   That is why I am trying to get CRYSTAL CLEAR explanations before I submit to anything that calls itself the true church.  I want to worship God in Orthodoxy as defined - the right way.   

That's what is hard for people to answer, because frankly many don't know.  They just "submit" and don't care about the principals of what they submit to because of what their particular "jurisdiction" believes.  That's why we have those that are EO, OO, RC, Protestant, Anabaptist, pro ecumenism, anti ecumenism, iconoclasts.... the list goes on.  People submit and get afraid to ask questions or challenge the legitimacy of the councils themselves, saints, or ecumenical patriarchs.

In other words I want to do the right thing, and I'm seeking out Orthodox apologetics, not to blindly submit.
I'll submit to the "church" when I know its the right church.  I'm all ears when it makes sense.





Its not an either or question. The Eastern Church doesn't make lists in rank order. God is first Bible second etc etc. If you make something other than God number 1 then you are taking away something from him. That kind of thinking has no place in our World View.

These things are synergistic. If you obey Christ's Church, you obey him. If you wish to be obedient to God than you must be Obedient to his Church. The Church isnt an idea, it's exists physically. If you remain outside of it, your various confusions will certainly continue. If you begin the process of theosis and become a Practicing Christian, you will heal up. If you keep over-thinking you will only end up submitting yourself to your own egoism.

So make you best guess. Join an Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox Church and stop fooling around. Youre wasting time.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #62 on: May 10, 2011, 06:08:26 PM »

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.
If you want to go this route, then be prepared to take a machete to every Gospel except Matthew or Mark (depending on which you want your "base" to be). You seem to distrust the early Christians who preserved the faith for you immensely. Truth be told, I also struggle with this, but it's an "all or nothing" deal, and I can't accept any re-constructionist compromise.

Quote
Do we want to trust things that came from councils 325 years later and on held by a started by a world leader (Constantine)?
St. Constantine convoked the council, but did not rule over it. He also, therefore, added nothing to the apostolic faith, and any assertion otherwise finds no basis in any primary source.

Quote
What about Nazarite Christians?
Were "Nazarite Christians" (how do we distiguish between the Fathers' "Nazarenes", the Ebionites, etc) Gentiles? If they were not Gentiles, then the Council of Jerusalem does not refer to them.

Quote
Did Jesus teach worship on the Sabbath, or the 1st Day?
Both, but made the first day an especially Holy Day for worship:

Gospel of John:

So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.” And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord. So Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. “If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained.”

But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples were saying to him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.”

After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”

Gospel of Luke:

As they were talking about these things, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, “Peace to you!” But they were startled and frightened and thought they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them.

Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.”
The Ascension

Then he led them out as far as Bethany, and lifting up his hands he blessed them. While he blessed them, he parted from them and was carried up into heaven. And they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple blessing God.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 06:15:20 PM 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
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 #63 on: May 10, 2011, 06:14:38 PM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #64 on: May 10, 2011, 06:58:05 PM »

For instance, a snake or hog was not food to the Jews at all.

It was not food that they were permitted to eat, but I think you'd need more evidence that the Jews did not consider it to be food at all, as if it was scrap metal or something. I would never eat fermented fish, nor is it available anywhere in my area, but that does not stop me from acknowledging that it is in fact food.

This seems to be a tenuous a priori assertion on your part with no evidence to back it up...

None the less, "we call it a council", but did they?

The Great Councils have never considered themselves to be Great Councils. That distinction is always conferred afterwards by others.

Do we want to trust things that came from councils 325 years later and on held by a started by a world leader (Constantine)?

Yes. The Holy Spirit can use whatever he wants to accomplish his will. In Jeremiah 25, God calls Nebuchadnezzar—who was holding the Jews in exile—his servant. God can carry out his will however he wants, even using sinful people.

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

Both the Sabbath (Saturday) and the Lord's Day (Sunday) are holy days in Orthodoxy. But the Lord's Day takes precidence because the Resurrection is the 8th Day of Creation and the fulfillment of everything that came before.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 06:59:57 PM by bogdan » Logged
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #65 on: May 10, 2011, 07:41:14 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?
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #66 on: May 10, 2011, 10:59:25 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.
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: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #67 on: May 10, 2011, 11:09:32 PM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

Because God is God.   There is only one God the father almighty, maker of heaven and Earth....  There is 1 church that is real, one belief that is correct.  This God is the key to our salvation.   The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam, except for God in the flesh himself, who was still circumcised.

Jesus/Yeshua is our hope and savior.  He is our example of baptism, our example of communion, our example in forgiveness, our example of love.
He's our example of how he ate, how he was circumcised, and how he preached the New Covenant.

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.

If God our example was circumcised then I believe it is right to follow his example just as I believe it is right to take up my cross and follow him.
If God allowed himself to be circumcised, I believe we should as well, because our bodies are the Holy temple of God.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #68 on: May 10, 2011, 11:31:58 PM »

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.
Yes he was, he took his flesh from the Theotokos.

If God our example was circumcised then I believe it is right to follow his example just as I believe it is right to take up my cross and follow him.
If God allowed himself to be circumcised, I believe we should as well, because our bodies are the Holy temple of God.

The Holy Apostle Paul disagrees:

From Philippians 3:

"Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.

But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead."

From Galatians 5:

"It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love.

You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion did not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough. I have confidence in you in the Lord that you will adopt no other view; but the one who is disturbing you will bear his judgment, whoever he is. But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been abolished. I wish that those who are troubling you would even mutilate themselves."
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 11:33:56 PM 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #69 on: May 10, 2011, 11:33:06 PM »

Do we want to trust things that came from councils 325 years later and on held by a started by a world leader (Constantine)?
Quote
Yes. The Holy Spirit can use whatever he wants to accomplish his will. In Jeremiah 25, God calls Nebuchadnezzar—who was holding the Jews in exile—his servant. God can carry out his will however he wants, even using sinful people.

Do you believe it was God's will was Constantine (who many say was not in charge) banning Arius?
Do you believe it was God's will was for St. Nicholas of Myra to assault Arius?

I don't believe that everything that went on at those councils were God's will.  That's why I have so many questions.  What I'm seeing is the "belief" that the Holy Spirit had his will over the councils.  God never declared the councils to be his will.  Men did this.  The book of Acts started the vote, written by Luke, a follower of Paul.  Then there were many issues in those times and power grabs that through centuries led up to Nicea.

Let me ask you a question.

Many people say the Bible (compiled at council) by the Holy Spirit.  I'll refer back to my question about Luke & the story of the thieves being completely different than Matthew or Mark.  Why would the Holy Spirit include contradictory stories?  I can only assume because this was a vote by men, who overlooked the book of Luke.  It's confusing.  Can one be saved on their death bed?  Or does one have go up the symbolic ladder of Jacob and lead a good life? What about the book of Clement, that was left out of the Bible because he spoke of "lands beyond the ocean", yet Clement was read in the early Christian churches.  Again, I believe because MEN believed the world was flat.  How could Clement have known this without his book truly being inspired by God?  I find the book of Clement as an authority because of this, and also because it was read by early Christians.  But it was left out by votes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing on Luke.  But that part is absolutely not like the other testimonies at all.  I can't imagine this important moment in our savior's death being messed up.  Either that or Mark & Matthew had it wrong.  Either way, somebody had it wrong.  The point is, it was voted in anyway.

So to give God's inspiration absolute credit, I am forced to say the council was not inspired by God on this vote.  If I am to believe so, I am to believe that God made a mistake, which is blasphemy.  So I am forced to say the council itself was a vote of men.

Does that make all their votes wrong?  Absolutely not.  But there are key elements I must wrench through.  I can't follow blind, my mind refuses to work like that.

So indeed I question many things, even some of the books in the Bible.

I believe we do not think as Jews as Peter was.   When I see a snake, rat, or elephant, I don't think of them as food or my mouth does not water.  If we put a snake on a stick and roasted it, I would still not consider it food.  I do think of cows, chickens, (even live) as food.  Jews do not think of non Kosher things as food.   Ask them today.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 11:34:45 PM by yeshuaisiam » Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
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 #70 on: May 10, 2011, 11:34:20 PM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam [...]

If this were true, why was the promised land taken from the Canaanites and given to the then-Hebrews (later-Israelites)? Why were non-Jews forbidden to enter the Court of the Women and the Holy Place of the Temple of Jerusalem? Why did the Jews before the time of Christ themselves not expect non-Jews to keep the Mosaic law? Why were the Samaritans considered ritually unclean? If non-Jews were bound by the covenant with Abraham, they should also have inherited the benefits of its promises -- yet the scripture shows that they did experience those benefits.

Your understanding of the promises given to Abraham and his seed is deeply faulted. If the promises given to Abraham and his seed were intended to apply to all, why would the Apostle Paul have been moved by the Spirit to say that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek? This statement presupposes the covenantal distinction between Jew and non-Jew which applied before the incarnation of our Lord.

It is true that salvation is "of the Jews", but Judaism is not salvation.

I hope you trust that I am pressing you to lead you to the truth, not to be nasty. I am sure cleverer people will show you more of the truth than I am able.
Logged

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

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


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


« Reply #71 on: May 10, 2011, 11:44:01 PM »

Do you believe that Christ was truely man and God?  If so, then you must believe he took his humanity from Mary.  As such (unless you are proposing Mary was not really a Jew) Christ was genetically Jewish. 

As for everyone being under Abraham's covenant with God, you should ask a Jew about that (any of them from Judah himself, and after).
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
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #72 on: May 10, 2011, 11:49:32 PM »

Do you believe it was God's will was for St. Nicholas of Myra to assault Arius?
St. Nicholas repented of that.

Many people say the Bible (compiled at council) by the Holy Spirit.  
What council? Is this? Can you cite the source for it?

Why would the Holy Spirit include contradictory stories?  I can only assume because this was a vote by men, who overlooked the book of Luke.  It's confusing. Can one be saved on their death bed?  Or does one have go up the symbolic ladder of Jacob and lead a good life?
Christ forgave all the sins of the Paralytic man in the Gospel of Mark without him having to walk up a ladder. In fact, the juxtaposition of paralytic and "getting up to walk" and salvation is probably deliberate.


What about the book of Clement, that was left out of the Bible because he spoke of "lands beyond the ocean", yet Clement was read in the early Christian churches.  Again, I believe because MEN believed the world was flat.  How could Clement have known this without his book truly being inspired by God?  I find the book of Clement as an authority because of this, and also because it was read by early Christians.  But it was left out by votes.
My dear brother, what on earth have you been reading? Clement was not left out for that reason, it was left out because it was not Apostolic. It also mentioned the existence of a phoenix-- do you affirm that phoenixes exist?

The Greek Fathers were more likely than almost all other cultures at their time to believe in a spherical earth. They had several Greek philosophers backing that notion. Clement was not left out for denying the earth's flatness! Might I add that Muslims, who inherited the knowledge of a round earth from the Greeks, claim that the Quran is true because it speaks of the Earth being round like an egg?

From now on, please post the source for claims like this claim about 1 Clement, because I feel we're having a serious information hygiene issue here.

I'd also like to add that I believe Clement is inspired of God, too, along with the writings of many saints. The Church Fathers do not disparage Clement's letter, in fact they recommend its reading. But it is not an Apostolic witness and so was not considered canonical.
The point is, it was voted in anyway.
By whom? When?

So to give God's inspiration absolute credit, I am forced to say the council was not inspired by God on this vote.  If I am to believe so, I am to believe that God made a mistake, which is blasphemy.  So I am forced to say the council itself was a vote of men.
1. So because you don't understand how to reconcile an apparent contradiction, one or the other must be false? Must either newtonian or quantum physics be false because we don't yet know how to reconcile the apparent contradictions between the two? If one does not understand how the theory of Gravity can explain objects of the same shape falling at the same speeds, do we assume it is in error?

2. Again, what council?
« Last Edit: May 10, 2011, 11:55:09 PM 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #73 on: May 10, 2011, 11:53:00 PM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam [...]

If this were true, why was the promised land taken from the Canaanites and given to the then-Hebrews (later-Israelites)? Why were non-Jews forbidden to enter the Court of the Women and the Holy Place of the Temple of Jerusalem? Why did the Jews before the time of Christ themselves not expect non-Jews to keep the Mosaic law? Why were the Samaritans considered ritually unclean? If non-Jews were bound by the covenant with Abraham, they should also have inherited the benefits of its promises -- yet the scripture shows that they did experience those benefits.

Your understanding of the promises given to Abraham and his seed is deeply faulted. If the promises given to Abraham and his seed were intended to apply to all, why would the Apostle Paul have been moved by the Spirit to say that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek? This statement presupposes the covenantal distinction between Jew and non-Jew which applied before the incarnation of our Lord.

It is true that salvation is "of the Jews", but Judaism is not salvation.

I hope you trust that I am pressing you to lead you to the truth, not to be nasty. I am sure cleverer people will show you more of the truth than I am able.

The questions that you are asking are interesting, but I can only answer with a question -

If all those mentioned in your questions didn't follow the 1st covenant and the commands of God, did it pay off for them or did they reap the rewards?

From God himself in John 4:22: Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

"we know what we worship".  (Plural we - meaning Jews/Judaism) There would be no point to teaching a Samaritan this (in my opinion), if all were not supposed to be in the covenant of the 1 true church?

In other words, pagans, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., all should find the 1 true church and Jesus Christ's example.  (my opinion).  He ate Kosher and was Circumcised.
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: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #74 on: May 11, 2011, 12:08:20 AM »

Do you believe it was God's will was for St. Nicholas of Myra to assault Arius?
St. Nicholas repented of that.

Many people say the Bible (compiled at council) by the Holy Spirit.  
What council? Is this? Can you cite the source for it?

Why would the Holy Spirit include contradictory stories?  I can only assume because this was a vote by men, who overlooked the book of Luke.  It's confusing. Can one be saved on their death bed?  Or does one have go up the symbolic ladder of Jacob and lead a good life?
Christ forgave all the sins of the Paralytic man in the Gospel of Mark without him having to walk up a ladder. In fact, the juxtaposition of paralytic and "getting up to walk" and salvation is probably deliberate.


What about the book of Clement, that was left out of the Bible because he spoke of "lands beyond the ocean", yet Clement was read in the early Christian churches.  Again, I believe because MEN believed the world was flat.  How could Clement have known this without his book truly being inspired by God?  I find the book of Clement as an authority because of this, and also because it was read by early Christians.  But it was left out by votes.
My dear brother, what on earth have you been reading? Clement was not left out for that reason, it was left out because it was not Apostolic. It also mentioned the existence of a phoenix-- do you affirm that phoenixes exist?

The Greek Fathers were more likely than almost all other cultures at their time to believe in a spherical earth. They had several Greek philosophers backing that notion. Clement was not left out for denying the earth's flatness! Might I add that Muslims, who inherited the knowledge of a round earth from the Greeks, claim that the Quran is true because it speaks of the Earth being round like an egg?

From now on, please post the source for claims like this claim about 1 Clement, because I feel we're having a serious information hygiene issue here.
The point is, it was voted in anyway.
By whom? When?

So to give God's inspiration absolute credit, I am forced to say the council was not inspired by God on this vote.  If I am to believe so, I am to believe that God made a mistake, which is blasphemy.  So I am forced to say the council itself was a vote of men.
1. So because you don't understand how to reconcile an apparent contradiction, one or the other must be false? Must either newtonian or quantum physics be false because we don't yet know how to reconcile the apparent contradictions between the two? If one does not understand how the theory of Gravity can explain objects of the same shape falling at the same speeds, do we assume it is in error?

2. Again, what council?

Nicholas repented, but it did not let Arius back in either.  Constantine obviously had authority in Nicea because he banished Arius.  I just don't want to whitewash it.

Yes the Bible was officially compiled together by vote at the council of Carthage.  Google has lots of info on it.

The paralytic man in John was also told to "stop sinning" emphasizing he was still on the "ladder" thus does not prove instant salvation.

As for Clement look into Biblical history.  Many books were non-apostolic in the Bible.  I mean Paul wasn't an apostle and he wrote:
Romans
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
1 Timothy
2 Timothy
Titus
Philemon

Also the entire old testament wasn't and apostolic.  Look up some reads on "the lost books of the Bible".  You'll find the sources as to why it was left out.   "Lands beyond the ocean".

Sorry, Muslims were WAY past Clement.

Quote
1. So because you don't understand how to reconcile an apparent contradiction, one or the other must be false? Must either newtonian or quantum physics be false because we don't yet know how to reconcile the apparent contradictions between the two? If one does not understand how the theory of Gravity can explain objects of the same shape falling at the same speeds, do we assume it is in error?

No I can reconcile a contradiction.  I can't blaspheme God by saying that the Holy Spirit played a role in the vote of a contradiction.
As for Newtonian or Quantum physics, tell ya what, this is vexing enough, lets not play hypotheticals.
As for gravity, again, hypothetical. 

Quote
2. Again, what council?
Carthage.
Logged

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

Posts: 4,353


« Reply #75 on: May 11, 2011, 12:19:13 AM »

Quote
As for Clement look into Biblical history.  Many books were non-apostolic in the Bible.  I mean Paul wasn't an apostle and he wrote:
Romans
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
1 Timothy
2 Timothy
Titus
Philemon
St. Paul introduces himself as an "apostle of Christ" in most of his letters and he's recognized as an apostle by the Church.

I'd also like to point out that Carthage had no ecumenical authority and different lists of scriptural canon continued to exist after it.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 12:19:54 AM by William » Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #76 on: May 11, 2011, 12:25:49 AM »

As for Clement look into Biblical history.  Many books were non-apostolic in the Bible.  I mean Paul wasn't an apostle
Yes he was.

Nicholas repented, but it did not let Arius back in either.  Constantine obviously had authority in Nicea because he banished Arius.  I just don't want to whitewash it.
The Council judged Arius a heretic. Constantine banished Arius. That does not mean he had authority at Nicaea; in fact, it seems to imply that he submitted to the council's judgment. Constantine obviously had misgivings about doing so, expressed by his later actions.

Also the entire old testament wasn't and apostolic.
But we're talking about the canonization of the New Testament, not the Old.


Look up some reads on "the lost books of the Bible".  You'll find the sources as to why it was left out.   "Lands beyond the ocean".
No thanks. A lot of those sources are frauds, forgers and outright liars. You made the claim about Clement 1, so you need to provide the source.
 
And even if, and I'm suspect of this, even if a single Father expressed this thought, it was not why Clement 1 was not placed in the canon. After all, Revelation goes bonkers and was permitted in after a bunch of debate.
Sorry, Muslims were WAY past Clement.
My point was that supposed scientific accuracy does not determine theological validity.

Carthage.
Good, I thought you might have believed it to be Nicaea. Carthage merely affirmed what holy Saints like Athanasius affirmed, and did not discredit the writings of Clement, Didache, Ignatius, Polycarp, etc just because they weren't published in the canon. In fact, this writings continued to be held in high esteem and used in theological debates.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 12:27:36 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


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


« Reply #77 on: May 11, 2011, 12:26:54 AM »

Paul was an Apostle, and I would also point out that the Jews have always believed in a Noahidic covenant, which all people's are called to believe.  And they do not deny that non-Jews should believe as they do.  However, the Jews have NEVER believed everyone is under the Abrahamic covenant.
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
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #78 on: May 11, 2011, 12:32:40 AM »

You will be hard pressed to find Messianic Jews willing to throw out the writings of  Luke, John, and the letters of Paul.

Heck, you might as well throw out Mark and become an Ebionite.
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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,876



« Reply #79 on: May 11, 2011, 01:24:29 AM »

!המשיח קם


I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam [...]

If this were true, why was the promised land taken from the Canaanites and given to the then-Hebrews (later-Israelites)? Why were non-Jews forbidden to enter the Court of the Women and the Holy Place of the Temple of Jerusalem? Why did the Jews before the time of Christ themselves not expect non-Jews to keep the Mosaic law? Why were the Samaritans considered ritually unclean? If non-Jews were bound by the covenant with Abraham, they should also have inherited the benefits of its promises -- yet the scripture shows that they did experience those benefits.

Your understanding of the promises given to Abraham and his seed is deeply faulted. If the promises given to Abraham and his seed were intended to apply to all, why would the Apostle Paul have been moved by the Spirit to say that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek? This statement presupposes the covenantal distinction between Jew and non-Jew which applied before the incarnation of our Lord.

It is true that salvation is "of the Jews", but Judaism is not salvation.

I hope you trust that I am pressing you to lead you to the truth, not to be nasty. I am sure cleverer people will show you more of the truth than I am able.

The questions that you are asking are interesting, but I can only answer with a question -

If all those mentioned in your questions didn't follow the 1st covenant and the commands of God, did it pay off for them or did they reap the rewards?

From God himself in John 4:22: Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

"we know what we worship".  (Plural we - meaning Jews/Judaism) There would be no point to teaching a Samaritan this (in my opinion), if all were not supposed to be in the covenant of the 1 true church?

In other words, pagans, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., all should find the 1 true church and Jesus Christ's example.  (my opinion).  He ate Kosher and was Circumcised.

We know that He ate kosher and was circumscized, and declared all foods clean, and that we wouldn't worship on the Temple Mount (you missed that in the Samaritan woman story).  Your point?
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,876



« Reply #80 on: May 11, 2011, 01:32:37 AM »

!המשיח קם


I believe we do not think as Jews as Peter was.   When I see a snake, rat, or elephant, I don't think of them as food or my mouth does not water.  If we put a snake on a stick and roasted it, I would still not consider it food.  I do think of cows, chickens, (even live) as food.  Jews do not think of non Kosher things as food.   Ask them today.
Although we walk after Christ and His Apostles, and not in the way of the Sadduccees, Pharisees and scribes and so have no need of your blind guides, I'm going to answer your question anyways: if you do not kill and prepare a chicken, cow, whatever according to halakha (Jewish law), it's not kosher either.  But they consider food, as they are allowed to eat it under certain circumstances (starvation, for instance, in famine).  A cheeseburger isn't kosher, but they consider it food, and, given the right set of circumstances, even an Orthodox Jew will eat pork.   But we know about St. Peter's scrupples as a Jew. Read Galatians.
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,876



« Reply #81 on: May 11, 2011, 01:40:33 AM »

!המשיח קם

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?

The Law didn't require worship on the Sabbath.  Nor did it mandatethe synagogue. He taught worship on the Lord's day by rising on it, as prefigures by the psalms, which many start (e.g. 24/25) "For the first of the week"
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
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #82 on: May 11, 2011, 10:04:49 AM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

Because God is God.   There is only one God the father almighty, maker of heaven and Earth....  There is 1 church that is real, one belief that is correct.  This God is the key to our salvation.   The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam, except for God in the flesh himself, who was still circumcised.

Jesus/Yeshua is our hope and savior.  He is our example of baptism, our example of communion, our example in forgiveness, our example of love.
He's our example of how he ate, how he was circumcised, and how he preached the New Covenant.

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.

If God our example was circumcised then I believe it is right to follow his example just as I believe it is right to take up my cross and follow him.
If God allowed himself to be circumcised, I believe we should as well, because our bodies are the Holy temple of God.

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.


Come again  Huh
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,960


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #83 on: May 11, 2011, 10:16:35 AM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam [...]

If this were true, why was the promised land taken from the Canaanites and given to the then-Hebrews (later-Israelites)? Why were non-Jews forbidden to enter the Court of the Women and the Holy Place of the Temple of Jerusalem? Why did the Jews before the time of Christ themselves not expect non-Jews to keep the Mosaic law? Why were the Samaritans considered ritually unclean? If non-Jews were bound by the covenant with Abraham, they should also have inherited the benefits of its promises -- yet the scripture shows that they did experience those benefits.

Your understanding of the promises given to Abraham and his seed is deeply faulted. If the promises given to Abraham and his seed were intended to apply to all, why would the Apostle Paul have been moved by the Spirit to say that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek? This statement presupposes the covenantal distinction between Jew and non-Jew which applied before the incarnation of our Lord.

It is true that salvation is "of the Jews", but Judaism is not salvation.

I hope you trust that I am pressing you to lead you to the truth, not to be nasty. I am sure cleverer people will show you more of the truth than I am able.

The questions that you are asking are interesting, but I can only answer with a question -

If all those mentioned in your questions didn't follow the 1st covenant and the commands of God, did it pay off for them or did they reap the rewards?

From God himself in John 4:22: Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

"we know what we worship".  (Plural we - meaning Jews/Judaism) There would be no point to teaching a Samaritan this (in my opinion), if all were not supposed to be in the covenant of the 1 true church?

In other words, pagans, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., all should find the 1 true church and Jesus Christ's example.  (my opinion).  He ate Kosher and was Circumcised.


I think you have miss understood the saying "Salvation is from the Jews". Let me recommend to you a very good book by a Jewish convert to the Roman Catholic Church : "Salvation is From the Jews" by Roy Shoeman. He addresses this saying in depth and teaches about the Place of Judaism in salvation from a Christian view point..

http://www.salvationisfromthejews.com/index.shtml
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 10:17:27 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #84 on: May 11, 2011, 10:19:26 AM »

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.
Quote
Yes he was, he took his flesh from the Theotokos.

Some may take that as borderline blasphemy.  God came down incarnate of the Theotokos, he wasn't conceived.
That's in the Orthodox creed.

Mormons believe he was conceived.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 10:19:59 AM by yeshuaisiam » 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: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #85 on: May 11, 2011, 10:25:17 AM »

I'm surprised no-one has really picked up the mandatory circumcision issue!
Also taken care of by the Council of Jerusalem...

And St. Paul's letters.

Agreed, but the very notion of mandatory circumcision seems to strike at the core of Christianity in a way that dietary practices perhaps don't.

Yeshuaisiam -- the council of Jerusalem and Peter's dream are obviously not going to convince you, so please discuss this with me from a different angle.

I'm sure you realise that the covenant God made with Abraham was made to apply only to Abraham's decendents. Please explain why you think people who are not Jews genetically are bound by the covenant with Abraham. This is absolutely fundamental.

Just saying we should do the same things the Lord did while he walked the earth is not even remotely convincing, because the Lord was genetically a Jew (and kept the Mosaic law in a way the Jews of his time would hesitate to even call "keeping the law").

Because God is God.   There is only one God the father almighty, maker of heaven and Earth....  There is 1 church that is real, one belief that is correct.  This God is the key to our salvation.   The covenant with Abraham applies to all, since we are all genetically bound to the fallen Adam, except for God in the flesh himself, who was still circumcised.

Jesus/Yeshua is our hope and savior.  He is our example of baptism, our example of communion, our example in forgiveness, our example of love.
He's our example of how he ate, how he was circumcised, and how he preached the New Covenant.

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.

If God our example was circumcised then I believe it is right to follow his example just as I believe it is right to take up my cross and follow him.
If God allowed himself to be circumcised, I believe we should as well, because our bodies are the Holy temple of God.

He was not a Jew genetically yet it all still applied towards him.


Come again  Huh

Unless we are going to say that God had sex & conceived with the Theotokos, he wasn't genetically a Jew.
Mormons believe God had sex with Mary.  I believe he "came through" Mary, but was not part of her genetics.

If we argue Jesus was born from Mary's flesh & genetics, then Jesus would be sinful, because of Original sin.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,926


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #86 on: May 11, 2011, 10:34:16 AM »

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.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2011, 10:35:09 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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #87 on: May 11, 2011, 10:45:43 AM »

Paul was an Apostle, and I would also point out that the Jews have always believed in a Noahidic covenant, which all people's are called to believe.  And they do not deny that non-Jews should believe as they do.  However, the Jews have NEVER believed everyone is under the Abrahamic covenant.

So when did he become an apostle?
By the church's viewpoint or Gods? (especially not including testimony of himself or his followers)

Jesus did not come on his own authority, but Paul always spoke on his own authority and was written about in his own books or followers.

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.

So what do we do? - We call men "father".  

An apostle is defined - "An important early Christian teacher" and "often interchanged with the word disciple".

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.

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: 4,256


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #88 on: May 11, 2011, 10:53:02 AM »

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.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,477


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #89 on: May 11, 2011, 10:57:56 AM »

yeshuaisiam,

Do you believe the New Testament to be written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit?

This is a yes or no question.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
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: 5,926


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.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,256


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: 4,256


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: 5,121


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: 12,960


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: 2,523



« 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: 12,960


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: 32,350


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« 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
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 13,659


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: 2,523



« 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 0.397 seconds with 128 queries.