OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 16, 2014, 03:56:47 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Is it necessary upon reception into the Orthodox Church to renounce the errors of Rome?  (Read 13924 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #270 on: June 29, 2011, 11:30:45 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Dear Wyatt,

Have you ever formally studied moral theology? 

M.
Not Eastern Orthodox moral theology. I have studied my own Catholic moral theology, but I am basing my post on comments that have been made on this very forum.

Has you study been formal and if so who has taught you?
Is RCIA formal? If you mean am I a theology student then no, but I went through the RCIA process before entering the Catholic Church in 2007, and I am currently going through a program that takes you through the entire Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church in a year. I also sat in with my friend as he was going through the RCIA process this past year and was Baptized and Confirmed at this past Easter Vigil. My parish now uses the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults in its RCIA program so I have read large portions of it as well. I am currently stuck in bed due to injuries and because of that have ordered a Kindle online to help pass the time. I plan to do a lot of theological reading on it as well.
Logged
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #271 on: June 29, 2011, 11:37:35 PM »

I hope you get well soon!
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,585



« Reply #272 on: June 29, 2011, 11:38:06 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Dear Wyatt,

Have you ever formally studied moral theology? 

M.
Not Eastern Orthodox moral theology. I have studied my own Catholic moral theology, but I am basing my post on comments that have been made on this very forum.

Has you study been formal and if so who has taught you?
Is RCIA formal? If you mean am I a theology student then no, but I went through the RCIA process before entering the Catholic Church in 2007, and I am currently going through a program that takes you through the entire Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church in a year. I also sat in with my friend as he was going through the RCIA process this past year and was Baptized and Confirmed at this past Easter Vigil. My parish now uses the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults in its RCIA program so I have read large portions of it as well. I am currently stuck in bed due to injuries and because of that have ordered a Kindle online to help pass the time. I plan to do a lot of theological reading on it as well.
Get well!
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,119



« Reply #273 on: June 29, 2011, 11:46:27 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Dear Wyatt,

Have you ever formally studied moral theology? 

M.
Not Eastern Orthodox moral theology. I have studied my own Catholic moral theology, but I am basing my post on comments that have been made on this very forum.

Has you study been formal and if so who has taught you?
Is RCIA formal? If you mean am I a theology student then no, but I went through the RCIA process before entering the Catholic Church in 2007, and I am currently going through a program that takes you through the entire Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church in a year. I also sat in with my friend as he was going through the RCIA process this past year and was Baptized and Confirmed at this past Easter Vigil. My parish now uses the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults in its RCIA program so I have read large portions of it as well. I am currently stuck in bed due to injuries and because of that have ordered a Kindle online to help pass the time. I plan to do a lot of theological reading on it as well.

Do you listen to podcasts? I recently gave Ancient Faith Radio a try -- first with the OL conference last week, then today I listened to Fr. Hopko on the filioque.

Not that I'm stuck in bed. But if you are, all the more reason for something good to listen to.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #274 on: June 29, 2011, 11:56:54 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Dear Wyatt,

Have you ever formally studied moral theology? 

M.
Not Eastern Orthodox moral theology. I have studied my own Catholic moral theology, but I am basing my post on comments that have been made on this very forum.

Has you study been formal and if so who has taught you?
Is RCIA formal? If you mean am I a theology student then no, but I went through the RCIA process before entering the Catholic Church in 2007, and I am currently going through a program that takes you through the entire Bible and Catechism of the Catholic Church in a year. I also sat in with my friend as he was going through the RCIA process this past year and was Baptized and Confirmed at this past Easter Vigil. My parish now uses the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults in its RCIA program so I have read large portions of it as well. I am currently stuck in bed due to injuries and because of that have ordered a Kindle online to help pass the time. I plan to do a lot of theological reading on it as well.

Do you listen to podcasts? I recently gave Ancient Faith Radio a try -- first with the OL conference last week, then today I listened to Fr. Hopko on the filioque.

Not that I'm stuck in bed. But if you are, all the more reason for something good to listen to.
I usually don't, but that one sounds interesting. I might have to give it a try. Lately, besides perusing this and a few other forums of course, I have been doing a lot of StumbleUpon and watching a little TV here and there.
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #275 on: June 30, 2011, 12:01:47 AM »

Get well, Wyatt!
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #276 on: June 30, 2011, 11:36:45 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,119



« Reply #277 on: June 30, 2011, 11:53:56 PM »

“And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes,
but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more."
Luke 12:47-48
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #278 on: July 01, 2011, 12:02:54 AM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.
Logged
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #279 on: July 01, 2011, 06:40:35 AM »

“And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes,
but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more."
Luke 12:47-48
We were just talking about how not everyone suffers the same in Orthodoxy. Note that the deeds are still worthy of flogging.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #280 on: July 01, 2011, 07:42:41 AM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.

Health and hospital may not have been the anthropology but the theology has always been and remains the fact that ALL sin...voluntary and involuntary, in knowledge and in ignorance...ALL objective sin committed by any person at all, disrupts God justice and providence in the entirety of creation.  The consequences of our negative thoughts, words and deeds impact God's good providence/justice negatively, regardless of blame or guilt.

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.

That means that ALL sin, ALL evil must be redressed, must be restored.  Each time we tear a hole in the fabric of creation's goodness...WE, in God's good grace must restore and be restored...whether or NOT we sin voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge and in ignorance.

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.

Mary
Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #281 on: July 01, 2011, 04:25:23 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2011, 04:26:32 PM by Wyatt » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,585



« Reply #282 on: July 01, 2011, 04:29:38 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.

Health and hospital may not have been the anthropology but the theology has always been and remains the fact that ALL sin...voluntary and involuntary, in knowledge and in ignorance...ALL objective sin committed by any person at all, disrupts God justice and providence in the entirety of creation.  The consequences of our negative thoughts, words and deeds impact God's good providence/justice negatively, regardless of blame or guilt.

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.

That means that ALL sin, ALL evil must be redressed, must be restored.  Each time we tear a hole in the fabric of creation's goodness...WE, in God's good grace must restore and be restored...whether or NOT we sin voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge and in ignorance.

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.

Mary
Anselm lives.  Cry
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
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #283 on: July 01, 2011, 06:09:13 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

Hi Wyatt.  I don't think she was talking to you, but of herself and all in general.  Just my take on it. 
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #284 on: July 01, 2011, 06:29:07 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

Hi Wyatt.  I don't think she was talking to you, but of herself and all in general.  Just my take on it. 
Well if that's the case then she should not have quoted my post as if she was responding to me.
Logged
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #285 on: July 01, 2011, 07:29:06 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.

Health and hospital may not have been the anthropology but the theology has always been and remains the fact that ALL sin...voluntary and involuntary, in knowledge and in ignorance...ALL objective sin committed by any person at all, disrupts God justice and providence in the entirety of creation.  The consequences of our negative thoughts, words and deeds impact God's good providence/justice negatively, regardless of blame or guilt.

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.

That means that ALL sin, ALL evil must be redressed, must be restored.  Each time we tear a hole in the fabric of creation's goodness...WE, in God's good grace must restore and be restored...whether or NOT we sin voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge and in ignorance.

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.

Mary
Anselm lives.  Cry
Aside from the condescending talk of unwashed masses, how is this not the Orthodox view? Isn't this why wet dreams, etc. are sins in Orthodoxy?
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #286 on: July 01, 2011, 07:35:57 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.

Health and hospital may not have been the anthropology but the theology has always been and remains the fact that ALL sin...voluntary and involuntary, in knowledge and in ignorance...ALL objective sin committed by any person at all, disrupts God justice and providence in the entirety of creation.  The consequences of our negative thoughts, words and deeds impact God's good providence/justice negatively, regardless of blame or guilt.

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.

That means that ALL sin, ALL evil must be redressed, must be restored.  Each time we tear a hole in the fabric of creation's goodness...WE, in God's good grace must restore and be restored...whether or NOT we sin voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge and in ignorance.

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.

Mary
Anselm lives.  Cry
Aside from the condescending talk of unwashed masses, how is this not the Orthodox view? Isn't this why wet dreams, etc. are sins in Orthodoxy?
Why would something be a sin if it is involuntary?
Logged
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #287 on: July 01, 2011, 07:39:02 PM »

Because our instincts and bodily functions are as fallen as the rest of us?

I don't know, I'm trying to understand the Orthodox view.
Logged
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,119



« Reply #288 on: July 01, 2011, 07:54:02 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

Hi Wyatt.  I don't think she was talking to you, but of herself and all in general.  Just my take on it. 

I don't think it's much of a stretch, Father, to conclude that the post was referring to him ...

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #289 on: July 01, 2011, 10:36:44 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

I am speaking VERY specifically about your grasp of moral theology.  You are misleading people here, and I have said so.  I think you may be reading more into what I have said about you personally...but you've argued and argued and argued...so I have to figure that you think you know all about what you are arguing here, and it seems to me that you do not know as much as you think.  That is not a slap at your character.  It is an assessment of this particular topic and how you are dealing with it...here and now.

M.
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #290 on: July 01, 2011, 10:38:00 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

Hi Wyatt.  I don't think she was talking to you, but of herself and all in general.  Just my take on it. 

Accurate insight...with particular reference to the quote above.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2011, 10:44:44 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #291 on: July 01, 2011, 10:40:12 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.

Health and hospital may not have been the anthropology but the theology has always been and remains the fact that ALL sin...voluntary and involuntary, in knowledge and in ignorance...ALL objective sin committed by any person at all, disrupts God justice and providence in the entirety of creation.  The consequences of our negative thoughts, words and deeds impact God's good providence/justice negatively, regardless of blame or guilt.

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.

That means that ALL sin, ALL evil must be redressed, must be restored.  Each time we tear a hole in the fabric of creation's goodness...WE, in God's good grace must restore and be restored...whether or NOT we sin voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge and in ignorance.

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.

Mary
Anselm lives.  Cry
Aside from the condescending talk of unwashed masses,

It is a phrase that used to be used ironically by the chairman of my dissertation committee, and it used to make me laugh because I was one of them.  He was a traditional prairie populist, so he was hardly ever condescending...

M.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2011, 10:41:47 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Shlomlokh
主哀れめよ!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Posts: 1,234



« Reply #292 on: July 01, 2011, 10:52:51 PM »

Because our instincts and bodily functions are as fallen as the rest of us?

I don't know, I'm trying to understand the Orthodox view.
This is how I was instructed by my priest on the matter, and how he was instructed by others, etc.

In Christ,
Andrew
Logged

"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos
Volnutt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Agnostic/Universalist
Posts: 3,107


« Reply #293 on: July 01, 2011, 11:39:20 PM »

The Eastern Orthodox believe nocturnal emissions are potentially sinful, so we shouldn't be surprised that they are opposed to ignorance getting someone off the hook for a sin. Heck, they don't even think an act being involuntary is an excuse.

Sin is illness of the soul my friend.  It is not about getting someone off the hook, it is about healing them.   I hope and pray that you are able to be mobile soon, and that your injuries heal. 
Thank you, Father. I realize that part of the reason for the disconnect in our conversation about sin is due to differences in the way Catholics and Orthodox explain/think of sin. We (in the Latin tradition) tend to think of sin as actions and offenses more often than we do as spiritual illness. I think that seems to be changing within our Church because I have heard more and more Priests and teachers within the Catholic Church refer to the Church as "a hospital for sinners," but I realize this imagery of sin as sickness may not have always been the predominant view in the West.

Health and hospital may not have been the anthropology but the theology has always been and remains the fact that ALL sin...voluntary and involuntary, in knowledge and in ignorance...ALL objective sin committed by any person at all, disrupts God justice and providence in the entirety of creation.  The consequences of our negative thoughts, words and deeds impact God's good providence/justice negatively, regardless of blame or guilt.

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.

That means that ALL sin, ALL evil must be redressed, must be restored.  Each time we tear a hole in the fabric of creation's goodness...WE, in God's good grace must restore and be restored...whether or NOT we sin voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge and in ignorance.

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.

Mary
Anselm lives.  Cry
Aside from the condescending talk of unwashed masses,

It is a phrase that used to be used ironically by the chairman of my dissertation committee, and it used to make me laugh because I was one of them.  He was a traditional prairie populist, so he was hardly ever condescending...

M.
Ah. Sarcasm is often lost on the net.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #294 on: July 01, 2011, 11:45:02 PM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

I am speaking VERY specifically about your grasp of moral theology.  You are misleading people here, and I have said so.  I think you may be reading more into what I have said about you personally...but you've argued and argued and argued...so I have to figure that you think you know all about what you are arguing here, and it seems to me that you do not know as much as you think.  That is not a slap at your character.  It is an assessment of this particular topic and how you are dealing with it...here and now.

M.
How have I mislead?
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #295 on: July 02, 2011, 12:19:00 AM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

Hi Wyatt.  I don't think she was talking to you, but of herself and all in general.  Just my take on it. 

I don't think it's much of a stretch, Father, to conclude that the post was referring to him ...

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

I know Peter.  I will let Mary speak for herself, and she has.   I just read it as a specific response and then a drift into general principle.  It is obvious the first part of the response was specific to him, but then a gradual move to a general admonition, that's all. 
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #296 on: July 02, 2011, 12:30:14 AM »

And when you have "learned it all"...when your time for learning in this life is over, what you will see is that, about God, you know very very little.  But as long as you believe that you know it all, you will know nothing.
I never claimed to know it all. If I actually thought that I would not read the Bible and the Catechism every single day, nor would I read theological texts from people such as Scott Hahn and Karl Keating and other good apologists. I think you think you know more about me than you actually do. Is it possible that I am incorrect? Sure it is. That hardly means that I think I know it all. I'm not sure why you wish to attack my character like that.

Hi Wyatt.  I don't think she was talking to you, but of herself and all in general.  Just my take on it. 

I don't think it's much of a stretch, Father, to conclude that the post was referring to him ...

Boil all that down to what the Church thinks the great unwashed masses can manage,  and you get the "rules" that you learned in the various places where you've learned the faith Wyatt...but you have not learned it all...not quite yet. 

I know Peter.  I will let Mary speak for herself, and she has.   I just read it as a specific response and then a drift into general principle.  It is obvious the first part of the response was specific to him, but then a gradual move to a general admonition, that's all. 

Wyatt has been ill in bed so he may not have picked up on Mary's drifting.  I'm not ill but I still find it hard sometimes to understand what Mary is saying.  But as you say,  I am easily confused and Mary is an expert at it.   laugh Cheesy
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #297 on: July 02, 2011, 12:41:35 AM »

^Father, I know you say this in jest, but just to make it clear I do not think that you are an easily confused person.  I was simply saying that, just as you found me too confusing in a certain area of eschatology, I also found you to be too easily confused in the same area.  I am sure the reverse can be said in other areas of theology.   But I do find you a sound thinker and appreciate your insights. 
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #298 on: July 02, 2011, 04:50:12 AM »

^Father, I know you say this in jest, but just to make it clear I do not think that you are an easily confused person.  I was simply saying that, just as you found me too confusing in a certain area of eschatology, I also found you to be too easily confused in the same area.  I am sure the reverse can be said in other areas of theology.   But I do find you a sound thinker and appreciate your insights. 

Father,  thank you for your kind words but I am most certainly confused by my brethren in my understanding of the many afterdeath states.   They blather on about them as if they have it all sorted out, but whenever I ask them for simple definitions which I can understand they shut up.

hell

hades

sheol

gehenna

tartarus

the lake of fire

the place of nice waiting

the place of very not-nice waiting.....etc.

Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #299 on: July 02, 2011, 05:11:57 AM »

^Father, I know you say this in jest, but just to make it clear I do not think that you are an easily confused person.  I was simply saying that, just as you found me too confusing in a certain area of eschatology, I also found you to be too easily confused in the same area.  I am sure the reverse can be said in other areas of theology.   But I do find you a sound thinker and appreciate your insights. 

Father,  thank you for your kind words but I am most certainly confused by my brethren in my understanding of the many afterdeath states.   They blather on about them as if they have it all sorted out, but whenever I ask them for simple definitions which I can understand they shut up.

hell

hades

sheol

gehenna

tartarus

the lake of fire

the place of nice waiting

the place of very not-nice waiting.....etc.


Since you have asked for your brethren to clarify, I hope that you will not mind if I take a shot at it.
There is (according to R. Catholic belief) heaven, hell, and purgatory.
As you have mentioned, there is the place of waiting, which in the Apostle's creed we say: ....suffered under Pontius Pileate, was crucified, died and was buried. And He descended into hell, and on the third day He arose again from the dead.  The hell mentioned here is not the hell of the damned, but the place of nice waiting where Jesus announced the opening of the gates of heaven to the preChristian saved. This is also sometimes called limbo. But it is not the same limbo for unbaptised infants  as was previously taught in Catholic schools.
To sum up then: In the afterlife there are three places (according to RC):
Heaven,
Hell  and
Purgatory.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #300 on: July 02, 2011, 02:56:07 PM »

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.
If this is, in fact, true, then why does the catechism speak of reduced culpability based on one's mental state as well as other factors when determining the gravity of a sin, or even whether a sin took place at all. If sin can be involuntary, I wouldn't think the Catechism would speak like this.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #301 on: July 02, 2011, 03:11:29 PM »

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.
If this is, in fact, true, then why does the catechism speak of reduced culpability based on one's mental state as well as other factors when determining the gravity of a sin, or even whether a sin took place at all. If sin can be involuntary, I wouldn't think the Catechism would speak like this.

In moral theology, the Church distinguishes among sin...personal guilt...blame, which is not the same as guilt...and the fact that ALL sin/evil rends the fabric of God's providence for Creation...consequences that are intended and unintended, known or unknown, seen or unseen, etc.

So when you see this discussion on reduced culpability there are a couple of things that SHOULD spring immediately to mind:

NOBODY but God determines the personal guilt or culpability of a sinner...nobody.  Absolution says NOTHING about levels or magnitudes of personal guilt.  Once absolved, all sins are forgotten...however the consequences of that evil set loose in the world remain.

EVEN IF a person is absolutely blameless in willing an objectively sinful thought, word or deed, then that evil MUST BE REPAIRED...so that God's good Providence/Justice may be restored.

So that whether you are personally guilty of the sinfulness/evil of a thought word or deed makes no difference to the impact that evil, set loose in the world, has on any part of Creation.

Stated as simply as I can at the moment:  I can do evil/be objectively sinful without being blamed or without suffering guilt, but the consequences of that sin/evil are just as disruptive, as if I were totally to blame and exquisitely guilty.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2011, 03:15:01 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #302 on: July 02, 2011, 04:26:07 PM »

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.
If this is, in fact, true, then why does the catechism speak of reduced culpability based on one's mental state as well as other factors when determining the gravity of a sin, or even whether a sin took place at all. If sin can be involuntary, I wouldn't think the Catechism would speak like this.

In moral theology, the Church distinguishes among sin...personal guilt...blame, which is not the same as guilt...and the fact that ALL sin/evil rends the fabric of God's providence for Creation...consequences that are intended and unintended, known or unknown, seen or unseen, etc.

So when you see this discussion on reduced culpability there are a couple of things that SHOULD spring immediately to mind:

NOBODY but God determines the personal guilt or culpability of a sinner...nobody.  Absolution says NOTHING about levels or magnitudes of personal guilt.  Once absolved, all sins are forgotten...however the consequences of that evil set loose in the world remain.

EVEN IF a person is absolutely blameless in willing an objectively sinful thought, word or deed, then that evil MUST BE REPAIRED...so that God's good Providence/Justice may be restored.

So that whether you are personally guilty of the sinfulness/evil of a thought word or deed makes no difference to the impact that evil, set loose in the world, has on any part of Creation.

Stated as simply as I can at the moment:  I can do evil/be objectively sinful without being blamed or without suffering guilt, but the consequences of that sin/evil are just as disruptive, as if I were totally to blame and exquisitely guilty.
When you get time, could you provide me with an authentic Catholic source for this teaching?
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #303 on: July 02, 2011, 04:52:15 PM »

^Father, I know you say this in jest, but just to make it clear I do not think that you are an easily confused person.  I was simply saying that, just as you found me too confusing in a certain area of eschatology, I also found you to be too easily confused in the same area.  I am sure the reverse can be said in other areas of theology.   But I do find you a sound thinker and appreciate your insights.  

Father,  thank you for your kind words but I am most certainly confused by my brethren in my understanding of the many afterdeath states.   They blather on about them as if they have it all sorted out, but whenever I ask them for simple definitions which I can understand they shut up.

hell
hades
sheol
gehenna
tartarus
the lake of fire
the place of nice waiting
the place of very not-nice waiting.....etc.


Really, it is quite simple.  You make things more complicated than they need to be:

hell is of course an English word used for two different purposes, so we will take that out of the equation to avoid confusion.  

hades=sheol=the place of not very nice-waiting of prior to the resurrection (before they have been united to their bodies).  Tartarus is simply the deepest part of hades (depicted in the icon of the resurrection with satan bound held for judgment) holding those angels and persons who have sinned unpardonably.  The upper region (as it is depicted in the icon of the resurrection), inhabited with the souls of those who have sinned pardonably (in ancient terms Ἔρεβος)

gehenna=the lake of fire=the place of eternal existence of the ungodly in body and soul (as whole persons) after the resurrection
 
« Last Edit: July 02, 2011, 04:54:31 PM by FatherHLL » Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #304 on: July 02, 2011, 05:10:41 PM »

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.
If this is, in fact, true, then why does the catechism speak of reduced culpability based on one's mental state as well as other factors when determining the gravity of a sin, or even whether a sin took place at all. If sin can be involuntary, I wouldn't think the Catechism would speak like this.

In moral theology, the Church distinguishes among sin...personal guilt...blame, which is not the same as guilt...and the fact that ALL sin/evil rends the fabric of God's providence for Creation...consequences that are intended and unintended, known or unknown, seen or unseen, etc.

So when you see this discussion on reduced culpability there are a couple of things that SHOULD spring immediately to mind:

NOBODY but God determines the personal guilt or culpability of a sinner...nobody.  Absolution says NOTHING about levels or magnitudes of personal guilt.  Once absolved, all sins are forgotten...however the consequences of that evil set loose in the world remain.

EVEN IF a person is absolutely blameless in willing an objectively sinful thought, word or deed, then that evil MUST BE REPAIRED...so that God's good Providence/Justice may be restored.

So that whether you are personally guilty of the sinfulness/evil of a thought word or deed makes no difference to the impact that evil, set loose in the world, has on any part of Creation.

Stated as simply as I can at the moment:  I can do evil/be objectively sinful without being blamed or without suffering guilt, but the consequences of that sin/evil are just as disruptive, as if I were totally to blame and exquisitely guilty.
When you get time, could you provide me with an authentic Catholic source for this teaching?

What would you accept as an authentic source?

Try starting here:
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1048.htm
« Last Edit: July 02, 2011, 05:21:59 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,585



« Reply #305 on: July 02, 2011, 05:26:16 PM »

That means that when we sin in thought, word and deed, voluntarily or involuntarily, in knowledge or in ignorance...we indeed sin!!...That says nothing about blame, or guilt.  Blame and guilt are not our responsibility.  That belongs to God alone, and the prayers of the communion of saints and the communities of the faithful.
If this is, in fact, true, then why does the catechism speak of reduced culpability based on one's mental state as well as other factors when determining the gravity of a sin, or even whether a sin took place at all. If sin can be involuntary, I wouldn't think the Catechism would speak like this.

In moral theology, the Church distinguishes among sin...personal guilt...blame, which is not the same as guilt...and the fact that ALL sin/evil rends the fabric of God's providence for Creation...consequences that are intended and unintended, known or unknown, seen or unseen, etc.

So when you see this discussion on reduced culpability there are a couple of things that SHOULD spring immediately to mind:

NOBODY but God determines the personal guilt or culpability of a sinner...nobody.  Absolution says NOTHING about levels or magnitudes of personal guilt.  Once absolved, all sins are forgotten...however the consequences of that evil set loose in the world remain.

EVEN IF a person is absolutely blameless in willing an objectively sinful thought, word or deed, then that evil MUST BE REPAIRED...so that God's good Providence/Justice may be restored.

So that whether you are personally guilty of the sinfulness/evil of a thought word or deed makes no difference to the impact that evil, set loose in the world, has on any part of Creation.

Stated as simply as I can at the moment:  I can do evil/be objectively sinful without being blamed or without suffering guilt, but the consequences of that sin/evil are just as disruptive, as if I were totally to blame and exquisitely guilty.
When you get time, could you provide me with an authentic Catholic source for this teaching?

What would you accept as an authentic source?

Try starting here:
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1048.htm
Ooooh! Something specific! How novel!
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #306 on: July 02, 2011, 07:26:56 PM »

^Father, I know you say this in jest, but just to make it clear I do not think that you are an easily confused person.  I was simply saying that, just as you found me too confusing in a certain area of eschatology, I also found you to be too easily confused in the same area.  I am sure the reverse can be said in other areas of theology.   But I do find you a sound thinker and appreciate your insights.  

Father,  thank you for your kind words but I am most certainly confused by my brethren in my understanding of the many afterdeath states.   They blather on about them as if they have it all sorted out, but whenever I ask them for simple definitions which I can understand they shut up.

hell
hades
sheol
gehenna
tartarus
the lake of fire
the place of nice waiting
the place of very not-nice waiting.....etc.


Really, it is quite simple.  You make things more complicated than they need to be:

hell is of course an English word used for two different purposes, so we will take that out of the equation to avoid confusion.  

hades=sheol=the place of not very nice-waiting of prior to the resurrection

Father, I find you confusing since this is *not* what the Russian Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) is teaching in his books and lectures.  For example in "Christ the Conqueror of Hell".   Various points of his teaching are scattered thruoghout not a few messages in this forum.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #307 on: July 02, 2011, 10:49:30 PM »

^Father, I know you say this in jest, but just to make it clear I do not think that you are an easily confused person.  I was simply saying that, just as you found me too confusing in a certain area of eschatology, I also found you to be too easily confused in the same area.  I am sure the reverse can be said in other areas of theology.   But I do find you a sound thinker and appreciate your insights.  

Father,  thank you for your kind words but I am most certainly confused by my brethren in my understanding of the many afterdeath states.   They blather on about them as if they have it all sorted out, but whenever I ask them for simple definitions which I can understand they shut up.

hell
hades
sheol
gehenna
tartarus
the lake of fire
the place of nice waiting
the place of very not-nice waiting.....etc.


Really, it is quite simple.  You make things more complicated than they need to be:

hell is of course an English word used for two different purposes, so we will take that out of the equation to avoid confusion.  

hades=sheol=the place of not very nice-waiting of prior to the resurrection

Father, I find you confusing since this is *not* what the Russian Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) is teaching in his books and lectures.  For example in "Christ the Conqueror of Hell".   Various points of his teaching are scattered thruoghout not a few messages in this forum.

Where is there a contradiction with what Met. Hilarion has written?   
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7   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 0.179 seconds with 66 queries.