OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 28, 2014, 01:15:25 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 5471 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: 4,100


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: 4,100


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
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« 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: 5,768


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
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,521


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
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,521


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
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,021


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


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: 4,100


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
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,021


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


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: 4,100


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
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,021


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


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: 5,768


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: 4,100


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: 5,768


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
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,521


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: 5,768


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: 4,100


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: 4,100


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: 5,768


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: 4,100


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: 5,103


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: 5,768


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: 4,100


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: 4,100


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

Faith: None
Posts: 4,306


« 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

Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matt. 5:24
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,768


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: 5,103


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: 5,768


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
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« 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
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« 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
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« 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
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,521


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
************
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,521


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: 4,100


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: 4,100


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: 5,768


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: 4,100


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: 4,100


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: 6,462


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
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 0.221 seconds with 72 queries.