OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 20, 2014, 01:11:25 AM *
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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: River of fire?  (Read 1238 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 911


« on: October 07, 2012, 10:11:10 AM »

http://www.orthodoxpress.org/parish/river_of_fire.htm



'River of fire' is one of the popular and controversial books in Orthodox Church. What is/are you comment(s) on this book?

Why not every Orthodox Christians agree with what 'River of Fire' says ? What's wrong with the content of this book?
« Last Edit: October 07, 2012, 10:12:38 AM by walter1234 » Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2012, 10:17:20 AM »

Better yet...what is YOUR opinion?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 911


« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2012, 01:37:36 PM »

http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?2014-Is-The-River-of-Fire-Orthodox-doctrine

I find out that there is a lot of arguments about this book in other Orthodox Christian Forum.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2012, 01:38:11 PM by walter1234 » Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,586



« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2012, 04:20:47 PM »

I find out that there is a lot of arguments about everything in internet.

Fixed.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,459



« Reply #4 on: October 07, 2012, 04:33:13 PM »

Good Johnny Cash song...
Logged

Building up my spiritual life one blurry avatar at a time!
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 911


« Reply #5 on: December 19, 2012, 11:54:05 AM »

Better yet...what is YOUR opinion?

 
http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/articles/207/%E2%80%9C-river-fire%E2%80%9D-revisited/


How about Vladimir Moss ' critique on 'River of Fire'? Any comment about it?
« Last Edit: December 19, 2012, 11:57:05 AM by walter1234 » Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #6 on: December 19, 2012, 01:00:51 PM »

Better yet...what is YOUR opinion?

 
http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/articles/207/%E2%80%9C-river-fire%E2%80%9D-revisited/


How about Vladimir Moss ' critique on 'River of Fire'? Any comment about it?

And what is your opinion?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,631



« Reply #7 on: December 19, 2012, 01:03:07 PM »

It's not traditional at all but it's very Orthodox. And with that said, I sincerely hope, I've managed to offend both sides of the issue.
Logged
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 911


« Reply #8 on: December 19, 2012, 01:10:23 PM »

Personally, I like the teachings in river of Fire.

However, I am  considering to covert to Orthodoxy.I am still not an Orthodox Christian at this moment. And I don 't know whether the teachings in 'River of Fire' align with Orthodox faith and doctrine or not.
Some Orthodox Christians really challenge that the teachings in 'River of Fire' do not align with Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2012, 01:18:09 PM by walter1234 » Logged
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 911


« Reply #9 on: December 19, 2012, 02:39:17 PM »

It's not traditional at all but it's very Orthodox. And with that said, I sincerely hope, I've managed to offend both sides of the issue.
You mean the teachings in River of Fire are very Orthodoxy ?
« Last Edit: December 19, 2012, 02:41:13 PM by walter1234 » Logged
simplygermain
beer-bellied tellitubby
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA - Northwest, Baby!
Posts: 771


Zechariah 11:7


WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 19, 2012, 05:46:54 PM »

Having read both thoroughly, and coming from a Protestant background long before I found Orthodoxy, it seems it is easy to formulate many opinions about the subject and authors involved.

Here's my two cents...

1. V. Moss calls Kalomiros a heretic in his writing, yet never speaking about which part Kalomiros is being heretical. On top of this, he is totally ok with "original sin" and uses it as if it is synonymous with "ancestral sin". V.Moss needs to stop reading Western post schism theologians.
2. Kalomiros has a narrow view of justice but his point about God being a consuming fire and therefore the suffering in the afterlife helped me to stop looking at God as a giant bearded Michaelangelo in the sky that wants to squish me with his judging sandals and begin to look at God as a merciful Father.
3. Both of them should go study G. Florovsky and V. Lossky. Maybe pray a bit more (can't we all use that?) I'm sure they've both missed something.
                    A) Love for fellow man.
                    B) Love for God above all else.

Also, one should always beware of someone who thinks he is a theologian or calls himself an orthodox Christian writer.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2012, 05:53:41 PM by simplygermain » Logged

I believe, help Thou my unbelief!! - St. John of Krondstadt

http://Http://hairshirtagenda.blogspot.com

 Witega: "Bishops and Metropolitans and even Patriarchs have been removed under decidedly questionable circumstances before but the Church moves on."
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Crypto-Miaphysite
Posts: 4,199



« Reply #11 on: December 19, 2012, 11:34:29 PM »

"original sin" and uses it as if it is synonymous with "ancestral sin". V.Moss needs to stop reading Western post schism theologians.
I always say "original sin" myself. I'm pretty sure the distinction is contrived and, from what I've heard, seems to come out of anti-Western polemics.
Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2012, 12:11:48 AM »

Having read both thoroughly, and coming from a Protestant background long before I found Orthodoxy, it seems it is easy to formulate many opinions about the subject and authors involved.

Here's my two cents...

1. V. Moss calls Kalomiros a heretic in his writing, yet never speaking about which part Kalomiros is being heretical. On top of this, he is totally ok with "original sin" and uses it as if it is synonymous with "ancestral sin". V.Moss needs to stop reading Western post schism theologians.
2. Kalomiros has a narrow view of justice but his point about God being a consuming fire and therefore the suffering in the afterlife helped me to stop looking at God as a giant bearded Michaelangelo in the sky that wants to squish me with his judging sandals and begin to look at God as a merciful Father.
3. Both of them should go study G. Florovsky and V. Lossky. Maybe pray a bit more (can't we all use that?) I'm sure they've both missed something.
                    A) Love for fellow man.
                    B) Love for God above all else.

Also, one should always beware of someone who thinks he is a theologian or calls himself an orthodox Christian writer.


Not two cents, but GOLD! POM!
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA - Northwest, Baby!
Posts: 771


Zechariah 11:7


WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2012, 03:32:22 PM »

"original sin" and uses it as if it is synonymous with "ancestral sin". V.Moss needs to stop reading Western post schism theologians.
I always say "original sin" myself. I'm pretty sure the distinction is contrived and, from what I've heard, seems to come out of anti-Western polemics.

There is something to be said for addressing polemical issues, otherwise we wouldn't have had ecumenical councils. That said, study it, ask a priest, study it, pray about it...study some more. There is a huge difference between original sin and ancestral sin.

Are you to be held responsible for Adam's fall, or for your own? It's that simple.
Logged

I believe, help Thou my unbelief!! - St. John of Krondstadt

http://Http://hairshirtagenda.blogspot.com

 Witega: "Bishops and Metropolitans and even Patriarchs have been removed under decidedly questionable circumstances before but the Church moves on."
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2012, 04:03:36 PM »

I always say "original sin" myself. I'm pretty sure the distinction is contrived and, from what I've heard, seems to come out of anti-Western polemics.
There is something to be said for addressing polemical issues, otherwise we wouldn't have had ecumenical councils. That said, study it, ask a priest, study it, pray about it...study some more. There is a huge difference between original sin and ancestral sin.

Are you to be held responsible for Adam's fall, or for your own? It's that simple.

While some Protestants do teach this, Rome explicitly teaches against that in the CCC. The biggest difference between east and west that I've seen is primarily more in expression as a corruption of nature subject to death and corruption (east) and deprivation of sanctifying grace (west).
Logged

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

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
simplygermain
beer-bellied tellitubby
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA - Northwest, Baby!
Posts: 771


Zechariah 11:7


WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2012, 04:24:25 PM »

I always say "original sin" myself. I'm pretty sure the distinction is contrived and, from what I've heard, seems to come out of anti-Western polemics.
There is something to be said for addressing polemical issues, otherwise we wouldn't have had ecumenical councils. That said, study it, ask a priest, study it, pray about it...study some more. There is a huge difference between original sin and ancestral sin.

Are you to be held responsible for Adam's fall, or for your own?
It's that simple.

While some Protestants do teach this, Rome explicitly teaches against that in the CCC. The biggest difference between east and west that I've seen is primarily more in expression as a corruption of nature subject to death and corruption (east) and deprivation of sanctifying grace (west).

+1
« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 04:25:17 PM by simplygermain » Logged

I believe, help Thou my unbelief!! - St. John of Krondstadt

http://Http://hairshirtagenda.blogspot.com

 Witega: "Bishops and Metropolitans and even Patriarchs have been removed under decidedly questionable circumstances before but the Church moves on."
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Crypto-Miaphysite
Posts: 4,199



« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2012, 07:49:08 PM »

"original sin" and uses it as if it is synonymous with "ancestral sin". V.Moss needs to stop reading Western post schism theologians.
I always say "original sin" myself. I'm pretty sure the distinction is contrived and, from what I've heard, seems to come out of anti-Western polemics.

There is something to be said for addressing polemical issues, otherwise we wouldn't have had ecumenical councils. That said, study it, ask a priest, study it, pray about it...study some more. There is a huge difference between original sin and ancestral sin.

Are you to be held responsible for Adam's fall, or for your own? It's that simple.
That's not what I meant. Calling it "ancestral" instead of "original" is what I meant. The name only, not the theology, is what I'm referring to.
Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,939


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2012, 08:08:45 PM »

I always say "original sin" myself. I'm pretty sure the distinction is contrived and, from what I've heard, seems to come out of anti-Western polemics.
There is something to be said for addressing polemical issues, otherwise we wouldn't have had ecumenical councils. That said, study it, ask a priest, study it, pray about it...study some more. There is a huge difference between original sin and ancestral sin.

Are you to be held responsible for Adam's fall, or for your own? It's that simple.

While some Protestants do teach this, Rome explicitly teaches against that in the CCC. The biggest difference between east and west that I've seen is primarily more in expression as a corruption of nature subject to death and corruption (east) and deprivation of sanctifying grace (west).

I think the debate over this is somewhat unfair. Important officials in the RCC may think about and write about it, because they have to, but I bet the average RCC in his or her daily work doesn't. What's so bad about being against corruption and death? Well, shouldn't we be? This idea that the Orthodox and RCC ideas of what sin is and how to avoid it, are so vastly different that you'd have to charter a plane to get to the other side, seems a little cruel to me. We used to, as I remember, just worry about not sinning. You know, a lot like you.  Cry
Logged

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

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

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,352


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2013, 12:47:36 PM »

"Paradise and hell are one and the same River of God, a loving fire which embraces and covers all with the same beneficial will, without any difference or discrimination. The same vivifying water is life eternal for the faithful and death eternal for the infidels; for the first it is their element of life, for the second it is the instrument of their eternal suffocation; paradise for the one is hell for the other."

"I say," writes Saint Isaac the Syrian, "that those who are suffering in hell, are suffering in being scourged by love...."

Will those in hell, be able to eternally resist that scourge of love?
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Tags:
Pages: 1   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 0.086 seconds with 46 queries.