OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 02, 2014, 10:31:42 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 2 3 4 5 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Re: A Few of Drake's Points  (Read 1202 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« on: March 24, 2014, 02:24:29 AM »

This debate started here: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,57159.msg1100958.html#msg1100958

- PtA



I will respond to a few of Drake's points, but do not have the time to write a detailed analysis....

Fr. John W. Morris



“I will respond to a few of Drake’s points”

>>>Why not all of them?

“but do not have the time to write a detailed analysis.”

>>>You get paid to talk about religion and you don’t have time? I gave up my scholarship from school, both opportunities to have a career and a family, which cost me my health and every friend I have had since I was a child over these issues of religion. I live in borderline poverty and have been for 13 years though I have been forced to work two jobs most of this time.  Yet, I found the time to study every last stich of your religion though I didn’t believe it. And yet you don’t have time?

“He makes a great deal of comments in the New Testament that in “later times,” many will fall away from the truth. He adjective “later” means just that “later” not immediately, but in the distant future.”

>>> Acts 20:29 states clearly that the apostasy would arise among Paul’s disciples.

“Instead, he claims that the very people who learned the Gospel from the Apostles fell away. As an historian, I find that claim incredible. Men like Sts. Ignatius of Antioch,  Clement or Rome who actually heard the Apostles, or St. Irenaeus of Lyons who learned from St. Polycarp, who learned from the Apostle John have much more credibility than someone like John Calvin who lived 1,400 years later and had no contact with the Apostles.”

>>>I know you Christians hate the Bible but this is incredible.

“I do not think that he really understands Orthodox theology because he does not present an accurate statement of what we believe.”

>>>I know your religion better than you know yourself. Debate me formally on whatever forum you like. I would love to publicly humiliate you for all to see.

“Part of the problem is that he is cannot get past the fact that we do not use the same language as Calvinists.”

>>>Oh yeah, that was why I wrote my almost 800 page Systematic Theology comparing language in Eastern Orthodoxy and Calvinism the whole way through.

“For example, although we do not use the Anselmic language of penal substitution”

>>>I don’t either but how you justify your doctrine of hell without some type of juridical language and divine retribution remains IMPOSSIBLE.

“or vicarious atonement, that does not mean that we do not believe that Christ died for our sins on the cross.”

>>>It just means that his humanity was a universal and thus eternal and thus not consubstantial with any human person.

“The difference is that we put the Cross in its proper context of the Incarnation and the Resurrection. The Cross is only part of Christ’s saving work which began with the Incarnation and ended with the Ascension. In Christ. God assumed all that is human”

>>>See, there you go. Messiah was not all that is human. He was a male not a female. He was a Hebrew not a Greek. He was not huperousia as much as you want him to be.

“to deify humanity and reunite us to Him. That is why St. Gregory the Theologian wrote, “That which is not assumed is not healed.”

>>>Which assumes the problem with man is his ontology, not his activity or tendency. You conflate all these categories because you are just as enslaved to Neoplatonism as the Romanists are.

“The problem with the doctrine of the vicarious atonement is that it is based on a partial view of salvation which is confined to the forgiveness of sins, and does not understand that God not only declares the believer righteous, God also makes the believer righteous.”

>>>Which assumes that righteousness refers to the genus of being. That it is a being and not the activity of a being. You are still laboring under Occam sir.

“There is a judicial aspect to salvation, but it is only one aspect, not the totality of salvation, which includes deification.”

>>>Asserting it is not justifying it. You are using ad hoc reasoning.

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.

“He fails to understand that there is a difference between forbidding to marry and placing restrictions on when one may marry.”

>>>A person must get married at a specific time. Deny the massive evidence I presented that marriage was prohibited by your tradition if breaking the 9th command is your thing.

“There is no prohibition of marriage in the Eastern Orthodox Church.  Indeed, unless one wishes to be a monastic, it celibacy is strongly discouraged among the parish clergy. However a man must marry before he undertakes the sacred office of the Priesthood. (actually Diaconate) Here Drake is twisting words instead of honestly dealing with the issue.”

>>>You replied to not a single quotation or reference from my writings and I am not being honest?

“There is a difference between fasting for a time and forbidding eating certain foods. Our Lord, Himself spoke of fasting. In Matthew 6:16, Christ says, “When you fast…” He does not say, “If you fast,” but “When you fast,” because fasting is a part of the Christian life. Besides the citation from Acts 14, there are several references to fasting among the earliest Christians in the Book of Acts.”

>>>Was it for the purpose of recoiling from the burden of physical constitution and for the purpose of penance? Nope.

“He accuses the Orthodox Church of being Gnostic. This is laughable.”

>>>I’m laughing at you not with you.

“Gnosticism taught that the material world is evil.”

>>>And that is why your monks fast to control their evil flesh with its desires for sex which brings the monk away from angelic celibacy.

“Orthodox bless the material world.”

>>>So why do you seek to escape the body at death? Why is celibacy better than marriage contrary to Gen. 2:18?

“We bless everything, our homes, our cars, our food, firetrucks, railroad, everything. Our worship is very physical.”

>>>So is Hinduism.

“Calvinism, on the other hand has no place for the blessing of the material world.”

>>> I’m no longer a Christian. I think all Christians are gnostics but maybe they don’t do it because it is superstitious nonsense that is not mentioned in the bible.

“The Sacraments are symbols and not real means of grace”

>>>First your sacraments are a laughing stock. They are inventions of heretics and anti-semites. Read Leviticus 23 and then seriously ask yourself how God could introduce a new feast without defining the timing of it. When is the Lord’s Supper supposed to be held again? How often? And how do you know? Second, even Calvinists believe that the Lord’s supper is a means of grace. You are thinking of Baptists.

“and the central act of worship is the sermon, which turns Christianity into an exercise of the mind or emotions.”

>>>That is hysterical. That was the way synagogue worship was performed for centuries.

“The model for the arrangement of a Calvinist Church is a medieval university lecture hall”

>>> I dealt with all your ridiculous lies when I was still a Christian:

http://olivianus.thekingsparlor.com/the-regulative-principle/the-synagogue-and-the-regulative-principle-by-drake-shelton

“The truth is that Calvinism is Gnostic because it denies the sanctification of matter.”

>>>Could you show me from the bible why the physical world needs sanctifying?

“He dismisses free will and does not understand that although God knows how we will respond to the Gospel, that does not mean that He predestines some to salvation and some to damnation.”

>>>Asserting it is not proving it. Again you didn’t quote a single statement I made. You are arguing against a straw man. Foreknowledge is causal enough. And don’t even try to play the game where you conflate a formal with an efficient cause.

“This goes completely against the entire spirit of the Gospel which teaches again and again that Christ died for all.”

>>>Those in hell as well?

“Drake contradicts the words of St. Paul, who wrote that God, “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

>>>You are conflating a decree and a moral will.

“I Timothy 2:4. This verse alone demolishes the entire Calvinist system for if God desires that all be saved and there is no free will, one must assume that all are saved.”

>>>Playing games with the word free will.

“However, we know that not all are saved.”

>>>On your theology they are all saved at the level of nature.

“Since God desires that all be saved and all are not saved, it is obvious that God has given us the ability to accept or reject His offer of salvation.”

>>>Given? Not innate? Be careful father, you may becoming a Calvinist.

“In other words, free will. Calvinism with its denial of free will makes God into a sadistic monster who sends people to hell without giving them a chance to be saved.”

>>>Sadistic according to what standard?

“Such a God is not the God of love described in the New Testament.”

>>>Romans 9. One vessel for honor, another for dishonor.

“Drake accuses Orthodox of being Arians and Monophysites.”

>>>Quote me now Father don’t keep punching those straw men you keep putting up.

“Thus at the same time, we deny the divinity of Christ and teach that the divinity of Christ absorbed His humanity. That is obviously a major contradiction. Actually, if one studies Calvin, his Christology is highly defective. He has a strong tendency towards Nestorianism.”

>>>So? Calvin is not the measure of truth.

“He denies the deification of the human nature of Christ and the “Communication of Attributes,” both of which are important doctrines from the age of the Holy Fathers.”

>>>Because your Jesus is a pagan deity. An attribute of God is omnipresence. If the human nature of messiah shares divine attributes then the human nature is omnipresent and thus not consubstantial with any human person.

“Finally, Drake uses all sorts of philosophical language to discredit Orthodoxy. However, this simple verbiage that really has no meaning. He actually uses high language to hide the shallowness of his theology and basic misunderstanding of Orthodoxy. Calvinism has become the latest fad among American Evangelicals.”

>>Fascinating because most Eastern Orthodox people I know know that Calvinism is Augustine’s Theology. That is the stage from which traditional Orthodoxy has implicated Rome on the Filioque. You have just embarrassed yourself beyond repair Father. It is time to retire from the religion and apologetics gig. Time to find a new job.

“However, like all fads it lacks depth. Instead, Calvinism provides easy answers to complex questions and falsely relies on human reason to understand the mysteries of God.”

>>>How else can a human understand something?

“Calvinism also appeals to people because it tells them that they are special because God has chosen them for salvation out of the mass of sinful humanity. As Orthodox Christians know the worst sin of all is the sin of pride, a sin produced by Calvinism.”

>>>Total depravity, pride? Actually it is your Pelagian system that states that God chose you because of some intrinsic good in you. That is the pride.

“St. John Chrysostom.”

>>>This man was the hero of the Nazis with his Nine Homilies Against the Jews. He was a scumbag piece of filth.

Thank you for affirming just how bankrupt your religion is sir.

Alpha Judaizer over and out

Considering that your only apparent purpose for visiting our forum was to post this polemic defense of your point of view, I'm going to bypass all the niceties of a private warning and just give you this. Our rules require that you speak of our saints with, at the very least, the modicum of respect that one would afford them in academic discourse. That means not using pejoratives. For your failure to employ this standard to our St. John Chrysostom, you are receiving this warning to last for the next 21 days. During this time, please read our Forum Rules so you can learn what we expect of our posters.

If you think this warning wrong, please appeal it to me via private message (and only via private message).

- PeterTheAleut
Orthodox-Protestant Discussion Moderator


Due to blaspheming against our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, I am increasing your warning to 40 days.  Please reread the Rules in the third tab in your upper left.  If they are not clear or you do not understand why you were given this warning, please feel free to send me a PM.

- LizaSymonenko
Global Moderator
« Last Edit: March 28, 2014, 08:52:09 AM by LizaSymonenko » 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: 37,866



« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2014, 05:00:37 AM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
The problem for you is, that it doesn't.
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
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 24, 2014, 05:07:09 AM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
The problem for you is, that it doesn't.

An assertion is not an argument.
Logged
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #3 on: March 24, 2014, 05:27:49 AM »

hello.

i find many of the Orthodox arguments in defense of the early church to be very compelling. though i do have a potential confound in my mind that i'd like to present to see what Orthodoxy might say to the matter.

one defense i often hear is that, if the early church fell into heresy and those teachings were not expunged, then the consequences of that would be that Christ would be a liar (He wasn't with us) and/or the Holy Spirit was weak and could not protect the church and lead into all truth, thus destroying the whole faith.

my thought is, God made creation and He made it good. the devil, however, seemingly jumped in there very early to muck things up and incite creation to head on a trajectory that was off the mark. this being true, though, doesn't seem to negate God's goodness, power or reliability, nor His eventual restoration of all things.

given that, is it really fair to say that the whole faith comes into question if God hadn't protected the early church in precisely the way we might think or want to believe? rather, hasn't God historically seemed to work in ways other than how we expect them to be?

also considering the parable of the wheat and tares, might this all not suggest the possibility that the Church is more a mystery of the heart than an institution? it would have to be, if it's not the institution that is to be protected, but those of a circumcised heart.

i don't personally find this potential objection to be in any way strong, but i would like it addressed.

any thoughts are appreciated. thanks for your time, patience and effort.

God bless.

Perhaps a more relevant question would be, would God allow His Church to fall into fundamental error immediately after the death of the Apostles and let His people remain in error until the 16th century. Or who is more reliable people like St.Ignatius of Antioch who heard Sts.Peter and Paul preach, or St. Irenaeus of Lyons who learned from St. Polycarp who learned from St. John or Luther or Calvin who lived 1400 year later and never heard an Apostle preach.

Fr. John W. Morris

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #4 on: March 24, 2014, 05:28:52 AM »

I will respond to a few of Drake's points, but do not have the time to write a detailed analysis....

Fr. John W. Morris



“I will respond to a few of Drake’s points”

>>>Why not all of them?

“but do not have the time to write a detailed analysis.”

>>>You get paid to talk about religion and you don’t have time? I gave up my scholarship from school, both opportunities to have a career and a family, which cost me my health and every friend I have had since I was a child over these issues of religion. I live in borderline poverty and have been for 13 years though I have been forced to work two jobs most of this time.  Yet, I found the time to study every last stich of your religion though I didn’t believe it. And yet you don’t have time?

+1

Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #5 on: March 24, 2014, 05:47:04 AM »

hello.

i find many of the Orthodox arguments in defense of the early church to be very compelling. though i do have a potential confound in my mind that i'd like to present to see what Orthodoxy might say to the matter.

one defense i often hear is that, if the early church fell into heresy and those teachings were not expunged, then the consequences of that would be that Christ would be a liar (He wasn't with us) and/or the Holy Spirit was weak and could not protect the church and lead into all truth, thus destroying the whole faith.

my thought is, God made creation and He made it good. the devil, however, seemingly jumped in there very early to muck things up and incite creation to head on a trajectory that was off the mark. this being true, though, doesn't seem to negate God's goodness, power or reliability, nor His eventual restoration of all things.

given that, is it really fair to say that the whole faith comes into question if God hadn't protected the early church in precisely the way we might think or want to believe? rather, hasn't God historically seemed to work in ways other than how we expect them to be?

also considering the parable of the wheat and tares, might this all not suggest the possibility that the Church is more a mystery of the heart than an institution? it would have to be, if it's not the institution that is to be protected, but those of a circumcised heart.

i don't personally find this potential objection to be in any way strong, but i would like it addressed.

any thoughts are appreciated. thanks for your time, patience and effort.

God bless.

Perhaps a more relevant question would be, would God allow His Church to fall into fundamental error immediately after the death of the Apostles and let His people remain in error until the 16th century. Or who is more reliable people like St.Ignatius of Antioch who heard Sts.Peter and Paul preach, or St. Irenaeus of Lyons who learned from St. Polycarp who learned from St. John or Luther or Calvin who lived 1400 year later and never heard an Apostle preach.

Fr. John W. Morris

Even if some of them knew or heard the Apostles it still doesn't mean anything even though that is highly unlikely and doubtful by the 70-90 A.D all of the Apostles except one were death. Even so there were many Johns, James, Andrews,Simons etc, you get my point. Some scholars even believed there were different John's penning in the New Testament. And afaik this "Apostolic Fathers" only speak of hearing of the apostles not meeting them in flesh and living with them. Even so you expect us to believe that people from diametrical opposite and different cultures would have communicated without problems and not get a distorted message? Just look nowadays when people of different cultures,religions communicate how much of the message is understood and how much is distorted. I recommend you observe countries with a lot of immigrants.

And there were "heretics" all the time. Why can't the real church be those that were labeled "heretics" ? If it is an option then there is a mathematical probability.
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Hawkeye
Onomatodoxicologist
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: With a schismatic twist.
Jurisdiction: An Old Rite soglasie
Posts: 620


My grandfather, the mad Mike


« Reply #6 on: March 24, 2014, 05:51:06 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?
Logged

Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #7 on: March 24, 2014, 05:52:15 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Hawkeye
Onomatodoxicologist
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: With a schismatic twist.
Jurisdiction: An Old Rite soglasie
Posts: 620


My grandfather, the mad Mike


« Reply #8 on: March 24, 2014, 05:53:15 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.
Logged

Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #9 on: March 24, 2014, 05:56:02 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 24, 2014, 06:31:20 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2014, 06:32:13 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2014, 06:33:57 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible, far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 06:34:37 AM by LBK » Logged
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2014, 07:03:46 AM »

Jesus looks nothing like a common religious Jew of the 1st century or ever. He looks like a visionare, a man of perspective, of human worth and value.
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2014, 07:43:57 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?

Logged
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2014, 08:13:13 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 


It's a rejection of the false interpretation of the Pharisees. Not of Judaism or Jews.
Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2014, 08:13:53 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 08:15:43 AM by xOrthodox4Christx » Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2014, 08:14:39 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.
Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2014, 10:22:39 AM »

I gave up my scholarship from school, both opportunities to have a career and a family, which cost me my health and every friend I have had since I was a child over these issues of religion.

I don't think "issues of religion" are what prevented you from having a career, family, friends, etc. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2014, 01:49:16 PM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Fr. John W. Morris
Logged
Trebor135
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 132


« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2014, 02:09:51 PM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Online debates rarely lead to one participant changing the mind of the other. Rather, they can prove beneficial and educational to all who are observing attentively.

I would thus ask that you not disengage, for our sakes if nothing else--or that someone else pick up where you left off.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 02:12:18 PM by Trebor135 » Logged

frjohnmorris
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 1,177


« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2014, 02:48:02 PM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Online debates rarely lead to one participant changing the mind of the other. Rather, they can prove beneficial and educational to all who are observing attentively.

I would thus ask that you not disengage, for our sakes if nothing else--or that someone else pick up where you left off.

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672. Just a few Bible verses are enough to demolish Calvinism;  I Timothy 2:4 that states that God, "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." I John 2:2, "he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." Romans 5:18, "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men." As Eastern Orthodox we are guided by the Holy Fathers, all of which affirmed the doctrine of free will. The only exception is Augustine, who himself also affirmed free will in some of his writings. For that reason, we cannot take seriously the arguments of someone who calls St. John Chrysostom, one of the greatest of the Fathers and experts on the meaning of the Bible in the history of Christianity a "scum bag."
The problem with this kind of argument is that we each play by different rules. We follow Holy Tradition which includes not only the Bible, but also the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils, others follow the teachings of one man like John Calvin or their own personal interpretations of the Holy Scriptures.

Fr. John W. Morris

Fr. John W. Morris

 

 

 
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 02:53:45 PM by frjohnmorris » Logged
truthseeker32
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOAA- Denver
Posts: 374



« Reply #22 on: March 24, 2014, 03:16:42 PM »

An assertion is not an argument.
From the quality of your arguments I am guessing you learned this principle after publishing them?
Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #23 on: March 24, 2014, 03:35:22 PM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 03:35:43 PM by Nephi » Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #24 on: March 24, 2014, 03:46:57 PM »

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.

You haven't read much into Second Temple Judaism studies if you're going to make that kind of dialectical assertion. Christianity clearly developed out of that context, with many early Fathers very blatantly making assumptions (using arguments, methods of interpretation, etc.) used by the Rabbis and such. Just read the works of the various scholars on the subject that have come out of, or affiliated with, Marquette University, for example. It's also clear reading James Kugel's (a Jew) works on the Bible, in which he quotes from early Christians alongside Second Temple era Rabbis etc. While not having a complete grasp of the diverse complexities of Second Temple Judaism, Larry Hurtado likewise does a decent job demonstrating the Jewish context for Christianity.

To say Christianity is a "calculated" rejection of Judaism is to either not understand Christianity or to not understand (Second Temple) Judaism, and since you're an ex-Calvinist I'll assume it's primarily the latter.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,892



« Reply #25 on: March 24, 2014, 04:11:34 PM »

I gave up my scholarship from school, both opportunities to have a career and a family, which cost me my health and every friend I have had since I was a child over these issues of religion.

I don't think "issues of religion" are what prevented you from having a career, family, friends, etc. 

On one hand it would seem admirable to forsake all for God, but then there's being God-forsaken.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 04:14:28 PM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #26 on: March 24, 2014, 05:25:02 PM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?
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: 37,866



« Reply #27 on: March 24, 2014, 07:58:43 PM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
An assertion is not an argument.
That's right, which is how your assertion in bold fails as an argument. Unless you are a Samaritan, in which you haven't added the books of Joshua and thereafter in violation of Deuteronomy.  But you then would have other problems.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #28 on: March 24, 2014, 08:01:24 PM »

hello.

i find many of the Orthodox arguments in defense of the early church to be very compelling. though i do have a potential confound in my mind that i'd like to present to see what Orthodoxy might say to the matter.

one defense i often hear is that, if the early church fell into heresy and those teachings were not expunged, then the consequences of that would be that Christ would be a liar (He wasn't with us) and/or the Holy Spirit was weak and could not protect the church and lead into all truth, thus destroying the whole faith.

my thought is, God made creation and He made it good. the devil, however, seemingly jumped in there very early to muck things up and incite creation to head on a trajectory that was off the mark. this being true, though, doesn't seem to negate God's goodness, power or reliability, nor His eventual restoration of all things.

given that, is it really fair to say that the whole faith comes into question if God hadn't protected the early church in precisely the way we might think or want to believe? rather, hasn't God historically seemed to work in ways other than how we expect them to be?

also considering the parable of the wheat and tares, might this all not suggest the possibility that the Church is more a mystery of the heart than an institution? it would have to be, if it's not the institution that is to be protected, but those of a circumcised heart.

i don't personally find this potential objection to be in any way strong, but i would like it addressed.

any thoughts are appreciated. thanks for your time, patience and effort.

God bless.

Perhaps a more relevant question would be, would God allow His Church to fall into fundamental error immediately after the death of the Apostles and let His people remain in error until the 16th century. Or who is more reliable people like St.Ignatius of Antioch who heard Sts.Peter and Paul preach, or St. Irenaeus of Lyons who learned from St. Polycarp who learned from St. John or Luther or Calvin who lived 1400 year later and never heard an Apostle preach.

Fr. John W. Morris

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.
You mean like this?
Quote
"The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #29 on: March 24, 2014, 08:04:31 PM »

I will respond to a few of Drake's points, but do not have the time to write a detailed analysis....

Fr. John W. Morris



“I will respond to a few of Drake’s points”

>>>Why not all of them?

“but do not have the time to write a detailed analysis.”

>>>You get paid to talk about religion and you don’t have time? I gave up my scholarship from school, both opportunities to have a career and a family, which cost me my health and every friend I have had since I was a child over these issues of religion. I live in borderline poverty and have been for 13 years though I have been forced to work two jobs most of this time.  Yet, I found the time to study every last stich of your religion though I didn’t believe it. And yet you don’t have time?

+1
-2
The internet suffers no shortage of false prophets, and the day doesn't have enough hours for a priest of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic-i.e. the only True-Church to waste, er, spend lots of time with every one of them, especially when he has to tend to the flock entrusted to him. How big is the flock that you pastor?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2014, 08:06:17 PM »

hello.

i find many of the Orthodox arguments in defense of the early church to be very compelling. though i do have a potential confound in my mind that i'd like to present to see what Orthodoxy might say to the matter.

one defense i often hear is that, if the early church fell into heresy and those teachings were not expunged, then the consequences of that would be that Christ would be a liar (He wasn't with us) and/or the Holy Spirit was weak and could not protect the church and lead into all truth, thus destroying the whole faith.

my thought is, God made creation and He made it good. the devil, however, seemingly jumped in there very early to muck things up and incite creation to head on a trajectory that was off the mark. this being true, though, doesn't seem to negate God's goodness, power or reliability, nor His eventual restoration of all things.

given that, is it really fair to say that the whole faith comes into question if God hadn't protected the early church in precisely the way we might think or want to believe? rather, hasn't God historically seemed to work in ways other than how we expect them to be?

also considering the parable of the wheat and tares, might this all not suggest the possibility that the Church is more a mystery of the heart than an institution? it would have to be, if it's not the institution that is to be protected, but those of a circumcised heart.

i don't personally find this potential objection to be in any way strong, but i would like it addressed.

any thoughts are appreciated. thanks for your time, patience and effort.

God bless.

Perhaps a more relevant question would be, would God allow His Church to fall into fundamental error immediately after the death of the Apostles and let His people remain in error until the 16th century. Or who is more reliable people like St.Ignatius of Antioch who heard Sts.Peter and Paul preach, or St. Irenaeus of Lyons who learned from St. Polycarp who learned from St. John or Luther or Calvin who lived 1400 year later and never heard an Apostle preach.

Fr. John W. Morris

Even if some of them knew or heard the Apostles it still doesn't mean anything even though that is highly unlikely and doubtful by the 70-90 A.D all of the Apostles except one were death. Even so there were many Johns, James, Andrews,Simons etc, you get my point. Some scholars even believed there were different John's penning in the New Testament. And afaik this "Apostolic Fathers" only speak of hearing of the apostles not meeting them in flesh and living with them. Even so you expect us to believe that people from diametrical opposite and different cultures would have communicated without problems and not get a distorted message? Just look nowadays when people of different cultures,religions communicate how much of the message is understood and how much is distorted. I recommend you observe countries with a lot of immigrants.

And there were "heretics" all the time. Why can't the real church be those that were labeled "heretics" ? If it is an option then there is a mathematical probability.
because, unlike heretics, the Church doesn't die out.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2014, 08:07:17 PM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.
Judaism has lots of concepts that are totally foreign and antichristian.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #32 on: March 24, 2014, 08:08:04 PM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 

What Bible?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2014, 08:09:23 PM »

Jesus looks nothing like a common religious Jew of the 1st century or ever. He looks like a visionare, a man of perspective, of human worth and value.
Oh?  And how do you know what a common religious Jew of the 1st century looked like?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2014, 08:10:31 PM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.
Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2014, 08:14:02 PM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
Yes, it seems he is a Olivianian, a sect that was begotten by him and in all likelihood will die with him.  Since the Olivianians are not legitimate children of Abraham, Moses or Christ, but the estranged child of Calvin, they need not detain us.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 08:15:42 PM by ialmisry » 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
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2014, 08:32:34 PM »

.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2014, 08:34:07 PM by xOrthodox4Christx » Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 25, 2014, 01:24:13 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 


It's a rejection of the false interpretation of the Pharisees. Not of Judaism or Jews.

"PROFESSION OF FAITH, FROM THE CHURCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE...in one word, I renounce absolutely everything Jewish"

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/jewish-oaths.asp

Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #38 on: March 25, 2014, 01:26:53 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.

You don't believe the apostle's 1st century teachings:

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom. 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Rom. 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

1 John 3:4 Sin is a transgression of the law
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #39 on: March 25, 2014, 01:27:22 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

Waiting for your answers, Olivianus.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2014, 01:28:49 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #41 on: March 25, 2014, 01:30:02 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Just before we go on: are the New Testament and the New Covenant the same in your eyes?
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 25, 2014, 01:30:22 AM »

I gave up my scholarship from school, both opportunities to have a career and a family, which cost me my health and every friend I have had since I was a child over these issues of religion.

I don't think "issues of religion" are what prevented you from having a career, family, friends, etc. 

Based on what?
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #43 on: March 25, 2014, 01:31:27 AM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Fr. John W. Morris

 laugh
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 25, 2014, 01:45:34 AM »

frjohnmorris

Quote
What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

And the Bible was condemned as judaizing at The Council of Laodicea. I care not what your councils have declared.

Quote
Just a few Bible verses are enough to demolish Calvinism;  I Timothy 2:4 that states that God, "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Restating your arguments does not somehow brush away refutations already given.

Quote
I John 2:2, "he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

 
            First,  I would like to deal with the fact that in every other verse, “propitiation” is used in a limited sense.  It is used in Romans 3:25-26 when Messiah is said to, “be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Yehoshuwah.” It is used in Hebrews 2:17 where Messiah is said, “to make propitiation for the sins of the people.”  It is lastly used in 1 John 4:10 where the Son is, “the propitiation for our sins.”
 
            Secondly, to give a proper scope to this text I would like to give the exact meaning of the wording that we have here.  Long ago it was prophesied some 700 years before the coming of Christ in the flesh, that the Servant of God would restore the preserved ones of Israel (Isaiah 49:6-7).  What is interesting is in the next sentence Isaiah says:
 
“I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth."
 
            Isaiah shed light on a subject that had been mentioned before but was never taken very seriously and would continue to be neglected.  The truth that Yahuwah would bring his saving light not only to the Jews but also to those of the whole world received little consideration.  When this “Servant” was manifested in the flesh and became a man, it was prophesied of Him that He, “was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. (John 11:51-52).” I believe this is the exact thing going on in 1 John 2:2.   
 
 Thirdly, there was a strange thing about the way the early congregation conducted itself after the death and resurrection of Messiah.  Yehoshuwah had plainly told them to, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations".  It was plain and clear that the prophecies of the Gentiles coming into covenant with God were blossoming.  However, we find that the early church seemed to totally ignore that due to all the tradition and history of the true religion.  We as Americans that have been raised as Gentiles with much Christian influence in this country have a hard time understanding this and I believe to our detriment. To a Jew, the thought of Gentiles in any number coming to the true God was laughable.  Even after Yehoshuwah had clearly given His will for the Gentiles in Matthew 28:19-20 we find the apostles in Acts 11 still not taking seriously this command.   Peter is harassed by the brethren (!) in Acts 11 due to his recent dealings with the Gentiles.  Even after the clear command of Messiah in Matthew 28 believers are uncomfortable with the Gentiles hearing the Word of God and Peter eating with them. This ethnic distinction is even clearer in verse 15 when he says, "And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning.”  The chapter progresses to shed light even on the reaction of the brethren, when they say, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life."  The most telling passage in this chapter is in verses 19-20 where we read, "So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that occurred in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone. vs. 20 But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who came to Antioch and began speaking to the Greeks also, preaching the Lord Yehoshuwah." This verse makes very clear that for a time the Jews thought that Yehoshuwah died to be the propitiation for theirs sins and not to those of the whole world.
 
This is the exact sense I believe John is using in 1 John 2 when he addresses the Jews and corrects their thinking that salvation belongs only to them.  Now the task that most see pertinent to address is this assumption that I make, namely that John is writing to Jews here in 1 John 2:2.
 
First, I would like to defend this position with Galatians 2:7-9:
 
“But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.”
 
This, "they" Paul speaks of is obviously James and Cephas and John as mentioned earlier and their ministry was admittedly to the circumcised.
 
Second,  I defend this position by the way John speaks to his audience.
 
“ 1 John 2:7  Beloved, I am not writing a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard.”
 
This has to be referring to Jews who had the law of God because Paul describes the Gentiles as being, “excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise(Eph 2:12)”, and “darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them(Eph 4:18)”.  Some commentators reject the notion that this, “from the beginning” means the beginning of time but believe it refers to the beginning of Christ’s ministry.  The problem I have with that is John uses this phrase numerous times and if you stay consistent with that position you do violence to the text.  For example:
 
1Jo 1:1  What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life
 
This is the exact same way he opens his gospel and here as well this refers to Messiah who has existed from the beginning of time, not the beginning of the N.T.
 
1Jo 2:14  I have written to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I have written to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.
 
Here the apostle speaks of the Lord again, and the beginning of Messiah’s ministry is not when He came into existence.
 
1Jo 3:8  the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil.
 
Here the devil is in context and he has been sinning much longer than 2000 years, or the beginning of Messiah's ministry.
 
1Jo 3:11  For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another;
 
This text is especially telling because the next verse mirrors this commandment in violation of it, when he refers to the incident between Cain and Abel.
 
            Now the final argument that I will address in the 1 John 2:2 passage is the semantic argument developed from the word, “world.”  First, seeing already that, “propitiation” used in this passage, would be at odds with every other passage using, “propitiation” in the, “general ransom” position, I conclude that the word, “world” cannot be in reference to ever single human being.  Not only do I take this position because of the use of, “propitiation” but I am also persuaded by the way, “world” is used in soteriological context.  For example:
 
“Mat 28:19  "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations”
 
      “Mar 16:15  And He said to them, "Go into all the world”
 
            This is a context where the word of God is being preached and men are being saved. Mark 16 is the direct cross reference to Matthew 28. This is a good context and sense of the way 1 John 2:2 is using, “world”.

See also Romans 11 for the gentile use of the word world.

Quote
"Romans 5:18, "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."

>>>Forcing you to believe all men everywhere receive justification of life, and that is absurd seeing that there will be men in hell. Maximus won't help you here because Paul said justification, not immortality. 



 

 

 
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #45 on: March 25, 2014, 01:46:48 AM »

An assertion is not an argument.
From the quality of your arguments I am guessing you learned this principle after publishing them?

What have you proved concerning the quality of my arguments? Where is your refutation?
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #46 on: March 25, 2014, 01:48:16 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #47 on: March 25, 2014, 01:51:04 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.

Where is the "marxist individualism" in either Nephi's or Fr John's posts you have quoted? If you're attempting to smear either or both of them, it speaks volumes about how shallow and bereft your ideas are.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #48 on: March 25, 2014, 01:55:39 AM »

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.

You haven't read much into Second Temple Judaism studies if you're going to make that kind of dialectical assertion. Christianity clearly developed out of that context, with many early Fathers very blatantly making assumptions (using arguments, methods of interpretation, etc.) used by the Rabbis and such. Just read the works of the various scholars on the subject that have come out of, or affiliated with, Marquette University, for example. It's also clear reading James Kugel's (a Jew) works on the Bible, in which he quotes from early Christians alongside Second Temple era Rabbis etc. While not having a complete grasp of the diverse complexities of Second Temple Judaism, Larry Hurtado likewise does a decent job demonstrating the Jewish context for Christianity.

To say Christianity is a "calculated" rejection of Judaism is to either not understand Christianity or to not understand (Second Temple) Judaism, and since you're an ex-Calvinist I'll assume it's primarily the latter.

A similar account was given by an ancient Christian Historian name Epiphanius of Salamis [The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis. Nazoraeans, 29. Against Nazoraeans.] where we read that the Natsarim, adherents of Messianic Judaism, were distinguished from Christians in name, were the original believers in the Messiah, distinguished themselves from Talmudists and were suspected of denying the Trinity Doctrine. Jerome also mentions them. [Letter 75, From Jerome to Augustine (A.D. 404), Chapter 4. ] Replacement Theology became so dominate in Christian Theology that Anti-Semitic Creeds such as the Profession of Faith, From the Church of Constantinople required, “As a preliminary to his acceptance as a catechumen, a Jew ‘ must confess and denounce verbally the whole Hebrew people…replying in these words: ‘I renounce all customs, rites, legalisms, unleavened breads and sacrifices of lambs of the Hebrews, and all the other feasts of the Hebrews, sacrifices, prayers, aspersions, purifications, sanctifications and propitiations, and fasts, and new moons, and Sabbaths, and superstitions, and hymns and chants and observances and synagogues, and the food and drink of the Hebrews; in one word, I renounce absolutely everything Jewish”.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/jewish-oaths.asp


I have proved it in great detail here: http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #49 on: March 25, 2014, 02:00:15 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #50 on: March 25, 2014, 02:02:40 AM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
An assertion is not an argument.
That's right, which is how your assertion in bold fails as an argument. Unless you are a Samaritan, in which you haven't added the books of Joshua and thereafter in violation of Deuteronomy.  But you then would have other problems.

The regulative principle: Lev 10:1-2 [obj. Exo 30:9 C.R. Lev 16:12 He took coals from an non-commanded source and not from the Altar], Duet 12:29-32 [obj. Temple/Tabernacle sacrificial service ans. Mat 15:7, Jer 7:31], Duet 4:2 [All of life], Jer 7:31, Num 15:39, Mat 15:7, Col 2:20-23 kjv "will worship".  Tabernacle Exo 25:9 ; Temple 1 Chron 28:11-19, 2 Chron 29:25.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #51 on: March 25, 2014, 02:06:01 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 

What Bible?

Most of them. Pick one. The most used christian bible I am aware of is the nasb. Would you like me to refute your religion with the nasb or another version?
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #52 on: March 25, 2014, 02:07:07 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.

Quoting yourself as a reference is hardly credible, when what you say flies in the face of almost every Biblical scholar, and by Christian theologians. Has your work been subjected to peer-review? If so, what was the result? If not, why not?

Regarding the hypostatic union, do you deny that Mary gave birth to God Incarnate, as prophesied in the OT, and most clearly in Isaiah 7:14?

You still have not stated who the Messiah is/was. What is his name?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 02:07:35 AM by LBK » Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #53 on: March 25, 2014, 02:07:43 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 25, 2014, 02:09:22 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
Yes, it seems he is a Olivianian, a sect that was begotten by him and in all likelihood will die with him.  Since the Olivianians are not legitimate children of Abraham, Moses or Christ, but the estranged child of Calvin, they need not detain us.

 laugh

The Natsarim sect is the original sect sir.

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/07/the-natsarim-the-original-messianic-sect/
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #55 on: March 25, 2014, 02:10:05 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?

The earliest extant Bible we have is the Septuagint.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #56 on: March 25, 2014, 02:10:48 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
Yes, it seems he is a Olivianian, a sect that was begotten by him and in all likelihood will die with him.  Since the Olivianians are not legitimate children of Abraham, Moses or Christ, but the estranged child of Calvin, they need not detain us.

 laugh

The Natsarim sect is the original sect sir.

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/07/the-natsarim-the-original-messianic-sect/

More self-referencing.  Roll Eyes
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #57 on: March 25, 2014, 02:11:10 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Just before we go on: are the New Testament and the New Covenant the same in your eyes?

I use the terms New Testament only to conform to your usage. I think the phrase contains some error. Renewed Covenant is the more accurate phrase.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #58 on: March 25, 2014, 02:12:24 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Just before we go on: are the New Testament and the New Covenant the same in your eyes?

I use the terms New Testament only to conform to your usage. I think the phrase contains some error. Renewed Covenant is the more accurate phrase.

Which only shows your ignorance of Greek.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 25, 2014, 02:13:57 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.

Where is the "marxist individualism" in either Nephi's or Fr John's posts you have quoted? If you're attempting to smear either or both of them, it speaks volumes about how shallow and bereft your ideas are.

You guys are pelagians in your anthropology. You think it is against free will that any human suffer under compulsions either outward or inward. You think for a person's identity to be determined in any measure by someone else to be against free will. That is why you are against patriarchy. Patriarchy requires compulsion.  
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #60 on: March 25, 2014, 02:16:05 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.

Where is the "marxist individualism" in either Nephi's or Fr John's posts you have quoted? If you're attempting to smear either or both of them, it speaks volumes about how shallow and bereft your ideas are.

You guys are pelagians in your anthropology. You think it is against free will that any human suffer under compulsions either outward or inward. You think for a person's identity to be determined in any measure by someone else to be against free will. That is why you are against patriarchy. Patriarchy requires compulsion.  

What does pelagianism (which Orthodoxy isn't, BTW, pelagianism is a declared heresy) have to do with Marxism?  Huh Huh Huh
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 02:16:33 AM by LBK » Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #61 on: March 25, 2014, 02:16:59 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.

Quoting yourself as a reference is hardly credible, when what you say flies in the face of almost every Biblical scholar, and by Christian theologians. Has your work been subjected to peer-review? If so, what was the result? If not, why not?

Regarding the hypostatic union, do you deny that Mary gave birth to God Incarnate, as prophesied in the OT, and most clearly in Isaiah 7:14?

You still have not stated who the Messiah is/was. What is his name?

Quoting your theologians is not in need of peer review. Here is the game you guys love to play: If I quoted sections from your theologians here I would be reprimanded for spamming. But if I give a specific link where I have cited and organized their quotes for easy access I am not qualified to do so. What a sad bunch you guys are.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #62 on: March 25, 2014, 02:18:21 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?

The earliest extant Bible we have is the Septuagint.

LOL! I knew you weren't going to answer the question. So predictable.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #63 on: March 25, 2014, 02:19:03 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
Yes, it seems he is a Olivianian, a sect that was begotten by him and in all likelihood will die with him.  Since the Olivianians are not legitimate children of Abraham, Moses or Christ, but the estranged child of Calvin, they need not detain us.

 laugh

The Natsarim sect is the original sect sir.

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/07/the-natsarim-the-original-messianic-sect/

More self-referencing.  Roll Eyes

That is a violation of the 9th commandment. That article is simply a quotation from Epiphanius.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #64 on: March 25, 2014, 02:20:05 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?

The earliest extant Bible we have is the Septuagint.

LOL! I knew you weren't going to answer the question. So predictable.

You've yet to answer my questions on the identity of the Messiah, on the Incarnation, etc. How 'bout it?
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #65 on: March 25, 2014, 02:20:47 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
Yes, it seems he is a Olivianian, a sect that was begotten by him and in all likelihood will die with him.  Since the Olivianians are not legitimate children of Abraham, Moses or Christ, but the estranged child of Calvin, they need not detain us.

 laugh

The Natsarim sect is the original sect sir.

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/07/the-natsarim-the-original-messianic-sect/

More self-referencing.  Roll Eyes

That is a violation of the 9th commandment. That article is simply a quotation from Epiphanius.

Oooh, I'm so afraid!!  Tongue Roll Eyes
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #66 on: March 25, 2014, 02:24:19 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #67 on: March 25, 2014, 02:40:39 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Just before we go on: are the New Testament and the New Covenant the same in your eyes?

I use the terms New Testament only to conform to your usage. I think the phrase contains some error. Renewed Covenant is the more accurate phrase.

Which only shows your ignorance of Greek.

 laugh Jer. 31:31 was originally written in Hebrew not greek. What game are you playing at sir?
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #68 on: March 25, 2014, 02:46:15 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.

Where is the "marxist individualism" in either Nephi's or Fr John's posts you have quoted? If you're attempting to smear either or both of them, it speaks volumes about how shallow and bereft your ideas are.

You guys are pelagians in your anthropology. You think it is against free will that any human suffer under compulsions either outward or inward. You think for a person's identity to be determined in any measure by someone else to be against free will. That is why you are against patriarchy. Patriarchy requires compulsion.  

What does pelagianism (which Orthodoxy isn't, BTW, pelagianism is a declared heresy) have to do with Marxism?  Huh Huh Huh

No natural compulsions. The person is free to act any way they will. Women can be equal to men. Women need not be confined to traditional roles based on nature because nature means nothing when it comes to action. Blacks are equal to whites and nature plays no part in their activity. Sure blacks can be accepted into Harvard on affirmative action and make straight A's because nature has not dictated how smart the black man is. Sure, he'll pass with flying colors because he has evoked the gnomie to do so. At least that is the philosophy; though we all know it isn't true, we say it is to make us all feel better.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 02:47:01 AM by Olivianus » Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #69 on: March 25, 2014, 02:48:11 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #70 on: March 25, 2014, 02:57:43 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Just before we go on: are the New Testament and the New Covenant the same in your eyes?

I use the terms New Testament only to conform to your usage. I think the phrase contains some error. Renewed Covenant is the more accurate phrase.

Which only shows your ignorance of Greek.

 laugh Jer. 31:31 was originally written in Hebrew not greek. What game are you playing at sir?

This game: Here is the Greek Septuagint text of this verse:

31 ἰδοὺ ἡμέραι ἔρχονται, φησὶ Κύριος, καὶ διαθήσομαι τῷ οἴκῳ ᾿Ισραὴλ καὶ τῷ οἴκῳ ᾿Ιούδα διαθήκην καινήν,

The term Καινή Διαθήκη  is the Greek name of the collection of books known as the New Testament. To this day, the word διαθήκη means testament, in the same way that last will and testament is used in English to refer to the legal document by that name.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #71 on: March 25, 2014, 02:59:46 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #72 on: March 25, 2014, 03:11:40 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?

The earliest extant Bible we have is the Septuagint.

LOL! I knew you weren't going to answer the question. So predictable.

You've yet to answer my questions on the identity of the Messiah, on the Incarnation, etc. How 'bout it?


Still waiting, Olivianus.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #73 on: March 25, 2014, 03:16:01 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



The Septuagint wasn't written by Christians, but by Jews. Blame them.

The context was clearly the New Testament.

The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/

Just before we go on: are the New Testament and the New Covenant the same in your eyes?

I use the terms New Testament only to conform to your usage. I think the phrase contains some error. Renewed Covenant is the more accurate phrase.

Which only shows your ignorance of Greek.

 laugh Jer. 31:31 was originally written in Hebrew not greek. What game are you playing at sir?

This game: Here is the Greek Septuagint text of this verse:

31 ἰδοὺ ἡμέραι ἔρχονται, φησὶ Κύριος, καὶ διαθήσομαι τῷ οἴκῳ ᾿Ισραὴλ καὶ τῷ οἴκῳ ᾿Ιούδα διαθήκην καινήν,

The term Καινή Διαθήκη  is the Greek name of the collection of books known as the New Testament. To this day, the word διαθήκη means testament, in the same way that last will and testament is used in English to refer to the legal document by that name.

John 13:34- Is love here a new or a renewed command?

2 Cor 5:17, Gal. 6:15 So upon conversion a Christian gets a new body and a new mind, or is the same body and mind renewed?

2 Pet 3:13 So are we waiting for the earth to be destroyed and another made or are we waiting for a renewal of the same earth?

And then Heb. 6:6 the word clearly means renew not absolutely new.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #74 on: March 25, 2014, 03:16:54 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?

The earliest extant Bible we have is the Septuagint.

LOL! I knew you weren't going to answer the question. So predictable.

You've yet to answer my questions on the identity of the Messiah, on the Incarnation, etc. How 'bout it?


Still waiting, Olivianus.

Still waiting for what? To read post 95?
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #75 on: March 25, 2014, 03:18:33 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #76 on: March 25, 2014, 03:20:53 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?

The earliest extant Bible we have is the Septuagint.

LOL! I knew you weren't going to answer the question. So predictable.

You've yet to answer my questions on the identity of the Messiah, on the Incarnation, etc. How 'bout it?


Still waiting, Olivianus.

Still waiting for what? To read post 95?

Are you so lazy to do so? #98 is also relevant.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #77 on: March 25, 2014, 03:24:17 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

And, as diligent and faithful Christians, we are defending our faith against distortions and heresies promoted by folks like you. Your "refutations" show how weak your positions are. The kindest thing to say about them is that they might be based on honest ignorance of what Orthodoxy is about.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #78 on: March 25, 2014, 03:25:14 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I maintain that I know more about this doctrine than any human being you have ever heard of. I will debate the best you got on it. Bring it on.

http://drakeshelton.com/drakes-triadology-stuff/
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #79 on: March 25, 2014, 03:26:09 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

And, as diligent and faithful Christians, we are defending our faith against distortions and heresies promoted by folks like you. Your "refutations" show how weak your positions are. The kindest thing to say about them is that they might be based on honest ignorance of what Orthodoxy is about.

Captain assertion. Can I get some arguments please?
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #80 on: March 25, 2014, 03:29:39 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I maintain that I know more about this doctrine than any human being you have ever heard of. I will debate the best you got on it. Bring it on.

http://drakeshelton.com/drakes-triadology-stuff/

God Himself revealed His Trinitarian self at various times in Biblical history - at the Oak of Mamre, at Christ's baptism in the Jordan, at the Transfiguration on Mt Tabor, and at Pentecost, with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the disciples. Yup, we, whom you shamefully and with cowardice accuse of despising the Bible, believe these things, and celebrate them in our church services.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #81 on: March 25, 2014, 03:30:52 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

And, as diligent and faithful Christians, we are defending our faith against distortions and heresies promoted by folks like you. Your "refutations" show how weak your positions are. The kindest thing to say about them is that they might be based on honest ignorance of what Orthodoxy is about.

Captain assertion. Can I get some arguments please?

Go back and read this thread from the start.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #82 on: March 25, 2014, 03:38:35 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I maintain that I know more about this doctrine than any human being you have ever heard of. I will debate the best you got on it. Bring it on.

http://drakeshelton.com/drakes-triadology-stuff/

God Himself revealed His Trinitarian self at various times in Biblical history - at the Oak of Mamre, at Christ's baptism in the Jordan, at the Transfiguration on Mt Tabor, and at Pentecost, with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the disciples. Yup, we, whom you shamefully and with cowardice accuse of despising the Bible, believe these things, and celebrate them in our church services.

Trinitarian self? In order for it to be trinitarian it would have to be a group not a self. You see I speak English, and the English language says that quantities more than one are plural.

The Oak of Mamre event would require you to say that God is three beings not one, contra Deut. 6:4.

Christ's baptism example is totally ad hoc as are the other examples.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 03:39:00 AM by Olivianus » Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #83 on: March 25, 2014, 03:51:22 AM »

Well, this is interesting.  Sort of.  My favorite was the offer to refute our religion with the bible.  That's always good.
Logged
LBK
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,895


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #84 on: March 25, 2014, 04:13:51 AM »

Quote
Christ's baptism example is totally ad hoc as are the other examples.

On what basis are they ad hoc, and why would their being ad hoc be significant?

BTW, still waiting for your answers on the identity of the Messiah and on the Incarnation.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 04:17:33 AM by LBK » Logged
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #85 on: March 25, 2014, 07:15:25 AM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Fr. John W. Morris

Perhaps is just "spiritual" repugnance.

All of this fruitless Churchism makes people sick.

Just saying..  Roll Eyes

You should "minister" to the "lost sheep" . If you minister only to the "saved" what reward will you have? When a man is in the pit then is when you should reach your hand to lift him up, not when he is sitting on the ground.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 07:16:03 AM by Skydive » Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #86 on: March 25, 2014, 07:19:01 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.

You don't believe the apostle's 1st century teachings:

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom. 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Rom. 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

1 John 3:4 Sin is a transgression of the law


I can give you a lot of NT quote showing that the Law has changed.

I think the Apostles were confused.

Judaism is an offshoot of paganism. Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism...
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #87 on: March 25, 2014, 07:52:08 AM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Online debates rarely lead to one participant changing the mind of the other. Rather, they can prove beneficial and educational to all who are observing attentively.

I would thus ask that you not disengage, for our sakes if nothing else--or that someone else pick up where you left off.

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672. Just a few Bible verses are enough to demolish Calvinism;  I Timothy 2:4 that states that God, "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." I John 2:2, "he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." Romans 5:18, "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men." As Eastern Orthodox we are guided by the Holy Fathers, all of which affirmed the doctrine of free will. The only exception is Augustine, who himself also affirmed free will in some of his writings. For that reason, we cannot take seriously the arguments of someone who calls St. John Chrysostom, one of the greatest of the Fathers and experts on the meaning of the Bible in the history of Christianity a "scum bag."
The problem with this kind of argument is that we each play by different rules. We follow Holy Tradition which includes not only the Bible, but also the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils, others follow the teachings of one man like John Calvin or their own personal interpretations of the Holy Scriptures.

Fr. John W. Morris

Fr. John W. Morris

 

 

 

Is the Jerusalem Synod ecumenical? Why are many Orthodox so reserved concerning this council because it speaks of transubstantion and etc?
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #88 on: March 25, 2014, 08:05:54 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)







« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 08:15:13 AM by xOrthodox4Christx » Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
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: 37,866



« Reply #89 on: March 25, 2014, 08:11:04 AM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Online debates rarely lead to one participant changing the mind of the other. Rather, they can prove beneficial and educational to all who are observing attentively.

I would thus ask that you not disengage, for our sakes if nothing else--or that someone else pick up where you left off.

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672. Just a few Bible verses are enough to demolish Calvinism;  I Timothy 2:4 that states that God, "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." I John 2:2, "he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." Romans 5:18, "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men." As Eastern Orthodox we are guided by the Holy Fathers, all of which affirmed the doctrine of free will. The only exception is Augustine, who himself also affirmed free will in some of his writings. For that reason, we cannot take seriously the arguments of someone who calls St. John Chrysostom, one of the greatest of the Fathers and experts on the meaning of the Bible in the history of Christianity a "scum bag."
The problem with this kind of argument is that we each play by different rules. We follow Holy Tradition which includes not only the Bible, but also the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils, others follow the teachings of one man like John Calvin or their own personal interpretations of the Holy Scriptures.

Fr. John W. Morris

Fr. John W. Morris

 

 

 

Is the Jerusalem Synod ecumenical? Why are many Orthodox so reserved concerning this council because it speaks of transubstantion and etc?
It is Pan Orthodox, and not Ecumenical, as it deals with external threats to the Church: Calvin did not arise among us.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #90 on: March 25, 2014, 08:14:24 AM »

I learned a long time ago not to waste my time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind on an issue. It is obvious that you are not interested in serious honest dialogue. The tone of your reply is offensive. When you call a major Saint of the Church a "scum bag" you show that you are incapable to constructive and serious discourse. Actually, your response shows the truth of my argument, Calvinism produces spiritual pride.
I get paid to minister to my flock, not to waste my time arguing with a fanatic who is only here on this site to insult us.

Fr. John W. Morris

Perhaps is just "spiritual" repugnance.

All of this fruitless Churchism makes people sick.

Just saying..  Roll Eyes
People are sick already.

If they don't want to come to the hospital, they will stay sick.

Just saying. Roll Eyes
You should "minister" to the "lost sheep" . If you minister only to the "saved" what reward will you have? When a man is in the pit then is when you should reach your hand to lift him up, not when he is sitting on the ground.
He shouldn't cry if he is biting the hand extended to life him out of the pit, because he prefers to wallow in the pit.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #91 on: March 25, 2014, 08:15:59 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.

You don't believe the apostle's 1st century teachings:

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom. 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Rom. 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

1 John 3:4 Sin is a transgression of the law


I can give you a lot of NT quote showing that the Law has changed.

I think the Apostles were confused.

Judaism is an offshoot of paganism. Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism...
Christianity isn't an offshot Judaism, nor Judaism an offshoot of paganism, so I can't put much stock in your knowledge of paganism.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #92 on: March 25, 2014, 08:24:01 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".
The Bible also says "These words the LORD spoke to all your assembly at the mountain from the midst of the fire, of the cloud and of the thick darkness, with a great voice, and He added no more. He wrote them on two tablets of stone and gave them to me. 23"And when you heard the voice from the midst of the darkness, while the mountain was burning with fire, you came near to me, all the heads of your tribes and your elders." Deuteronomy 5:22-3

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian.
The Nestorians would be surprised at that, as they are iconoclast and their namesake's theology leaves no room for the theology of the icon.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #93 on: March 25, 2014, 08:35:41 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.
Yes, it seems he is a Olivianian, a sect that was begotten by him and in all likelihood will die with him.  Since the Olivianians are not legitimate children of Abraham, Moses or Christ, but the estranged child of Calvin, they need not detain us.

 laugh

The Natsarim sect is the original sect sir.

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/07/the-natsarim-the-original-messianic-sect/
And they died out.  Your adoption of their mistakes in your own hasn't resurrected them, nor do Zombies make up a living faith.

The Church, not being a sect, of course has continued on.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #94 on: March 25, 2014, 08:36:54 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Which were translated by the Hebrews before the birth of Christ, and predate the Jews' Masoretic text.


I have no absolute commitment to the masoretic text and agree with your church in many points on this issue. However, do you believe the original was in greek or hebrew?
Doesn't matter, as we do not have the original.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #95 on: March 25, 2014, 08:38:49 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 

What Bible?

Most of them. Pick one. The most used christian bible I am aware of is the nasb. Would you like me to refute your religion with the nasb or another version?
Not translation.  I'm not limited to English, so I don't care what English translation you use.  I mean version: Samaritan?  Masoretic? Septuagint?  Vulgate?....
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #96 on: March 25, 2014, 08:41:02 AM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
An assertion is not an argument.
That's right, which is how your assertion in bold fails as an argument. Unless you are a Samaritan, in which you haven't added the books of Joshua and thereafter in violation of Deuteronomy.  But you then would have other problems.

The regulative principle: Lev 10:1-2 [obj. Exo 30:9 C.R. Lev 16:12 He took coals from an non-commanded source and not from the Altar], Duet 12:29-32 [obj. Temple/Tabernacle sacrificial service ans. Mat 15:7, Jer 7:31], Duet 4:2 [All of life], Jer 7:31, Num 15:39, Mat 15:7, Col 2:20-23 kjv "will worship".  Tabernacle Exo 25:9 ; Temple 1 Chron 28:11-19, 2 Chron 29:25.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #97 on: March 25, 2014, 08:47:49 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/
Luke and John, and all the Epistles, and Revelation, were originally written in Greek.

The "Hebrew" you cite is Aramaic. And it is irrelevant, as we don't have it.

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 08:48:39 AM by ialmisry » 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
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #98 on: March 25, 2014, 08:50:49 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.

You don't believe the apostle's 1st century teachings:

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom. 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Rom. 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

1 John 3:4 Sin is a transgression of the law


I can give you a lot of NT quote showing that the Law has changed.

I think the Apostles were confused.

Judaism is an offshoot of paganism. Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism...
Christianity isn't an offshot Judaism, nor Judaism an offshoot of paganism, so I can't put much stock in your knowledge of paganism.

Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples. Abraham himself according to the Bible came from the heathens. Some archeologists say that the jews were actually a caananite nomadic tribe and that Yahweh was at some point(initially?) heathen caananite deity and his wife was Astarte. The Documentary Hypothesis says the "Torah" "Pentateuch" was not written by Moses but had multiple authors. Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values. It's clear history that before there ever was a "Judaism" there was "Paganism" and that "Christianity" sprang forth from "Judaism". Judaism seems to have some syncretic pagan parts and for sure Christianity has syncretic Jewish teachings and Christianity came forth from the background of Judaism and the religion of the Jews.
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
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: 37,866



« Reply #99 on: March 25, 2014, 08:51:11 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?
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
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #100 on: March 25, 2014, 09:04:28 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/
Luke and John, and all the Epistles, and Revelation, were originally written in Greek.

The "Hebrew" you cite is Aramaic. And it is irrelevant, as we don't have it.

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.

Perhaps only to the Greek readers. There are no original manuscripts.

Do you think the Jewish Apostles would have not written the Gospels for the Jewish people? Perhaps there is a reason the Greek NT is dated so far away after Jesus' departure.
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
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: 37,866



« Reply #101 on: March 25, 2014, 09:08:05 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.

You don't believe the apostle's 1st century teachings:

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom. 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Rom. 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

1 John 3:4 Sin is a transgression of the law


I can give you a lot of NT quote showing that the Law has changed.

I think the Apostles were confused.

Judaism is an offshoot of paganism. Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism...
Christianity isn't an offshot Judaism, nor Judaism an offshoot of paganism, so I can't put much stock in your knowledge of paganism.

Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples. Abraham himself according to the Bible came from the heathens. Some archeologists say that the jews were actually a caananite nomadic tribe and that Yahweh was at some point(initially?) heathen caananite deity and his wife was Astarte. The Documentary Hypothesis says the "Torah" "Pentateuch" was not written by Moses but had multiple authors. Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values. It's clear history that before there ever was a "Judaism" there was "Paganism" and that "Christianity" sprang forth from "Judaism". Judaism seems to have some syncretic pagan parts and for sure Christianity has syncretic Jewish teachings and Christianity came forth from the background of Judaism and the religion of the Jews.
I haven't asked you to barf up more rancid bites of pseudoscholarship that some "experts" have prechewed for you, such as "Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples."  For one thing, "most" =/= "all."

The Bible says that Abraham came from the heathen? Oh, where does it say that?

Yes, I'm aware of the theory of a Yahweh-Astarte pair, and the meagre evidence twisted into such a narrative.  The Biblical narrative of the Hebrews falling into Canaanite paganism and assimilating the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob into it fits better.

The documentary hypothesis is for one thing, plural: its partisans can't agree amongst themselves on it.  Since the Pentateuch/Torah doesn't say that Moses wrote it, there doesn't seem to be much point on arguing it.

"Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values." I know that they don't appeal to the smug who think they know better, and don't want anything prove the contrary.  Atheism-the opiate of the dissolute.

Since Judaism dates from the time of Christ, and their Torah warns them of the Canaanite paganism over a thousand years before that, of course paganism (some form of it at least) predates it.  Han China predates the Declaration of Independence, but the 1776 date doesn't make America an offshoot of Han China.

Since the New Testament predates the Talmud, how did the former's Christianity "spring forth from" the latter's Judaism?

Before getting into the issue of syncretism, I need to know that you know the meaning of the term: give examples.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #102 on: March 25, 2014, 09:19:22 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/
Luke and John, and all the Epistles, and Revelation, were originally written in Greek.

The "Hebrew" you cite is Aramaic. And it is irrelevant, as we don't have it.

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.

Perhaps only to the Greek readers. There are no original manuscripts.
Since there are no original manuscripts, its language is irrelevant, as no reader can ipso facto read it.  One has to go by the text he has, not the one he conjectures.

Do you think the Jewish Apostles would have not written the Gospels for the Jewish people? Perhaps there is a reason the Greek NT is dated so far away after Jesus' departure.

Our earliest biography of Alexander the Great, who conquered all the known world, comes from writers who lived over two centuries after he died.  The latest Greek NT (i.e. John) written 70 years later by someone who knew Christ during His earthly ministry isn't "dated so are away," particularly given the prevalence of Greek writing in Palestine and among the rest of the Jews and Hebrews of the Roman World.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #103 on: March 25, 2014, 09:22:15 AM »

frjohnmorris

Quote
What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

And the Bible was condemned as judaizing at The Council of Laodicea. I care not what your councils have declared.
LOL.  The feeling is mutual.

Where did you get your Bible from?
Quote
Just a few Bible verses are enough to demolish Calvinism;  I Timothy 2:4 that states that God, "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Restating your arguments does not somehow brush away refutations already given.
Physician, heal thyself.
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
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #104 on: March 25, 2014, 10:07:13 AM »

Quote
Christ's baptism example is totally ad hoc as are the other examples.

On what basis are they ad hoc, and why would their being ad hoc be significant?

BTW, still waiting for your answers on the identity of the Messiah and on the Incarnation.

Those passages nowhere say the the one God is one being and three persons nor do they imply it.

The Messiah's name was Yehoshuwah. He was a caused being that pre-existed the creation. There was no incarnation. God did not be come man. A caused being that pre-existed the creation became man. 
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #105 on: March 25, 2014, 10:19:07 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)









Your essence and energies doctrine is self contradictory. The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical. The fact that the energies could have been different is irrelevant. Either way is an eternal economy.

You don't believe that God is light. You think God imported an economical action.

"On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)"

>>>You totally avoided my argument. Anyway, after I abandoned the trinity I abandoned my view of images of Messiah. I don't have a problem with images of messiah now. He is not the one God. Make as many images of him as you like.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #106 on: March 25, 2014, 10:21:59 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 

What Bible?

Most of them. Pick one. The most used christian bible I am aware of is the nasb. Would you like me to refute your religion with the nasb or another version?
Not translation.  I'm not limited to English, so I don't care what English translation you use.  I mean version: Samaritan?  Masoretic? Septuagint?  Vulgate?....

If I had to choose from one of those it would be the LXX.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #107 on: March 25, 2014, 10:23:48 AM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
An assertion is not an argument.
That's right, which is how your assertion in bold fails as an argument. Unless you are a Samaritan, in which you haven't added the books of Joshua and thereafter in violation of Deuteronomy.  But you then would have other problems.

The regulative principle: Lev 10:1-2 [obj. Exo 30:9 C.R. Lev 16:12 He took coals from an non-commanded source and not from the Altar], Duet 12:29-32 [obj. Temple/Tabernacle sacrificial service ans. Mat 15:7, Jer 7:31], Duet 4:2 [All of life], Jer 7:31, Num 15:39, Mat 15:7, Col 2:20-23 kjv "will worship".  Tabernacle Exo 25:9 ; Temple 1 Chron 28:11-19, 2 Chron 29:25.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.

The writings of the Gospels and Rav Shaul are Natsarim documents not christian. Your religion began with the false apostles and Justin Martyr. It has already been admitted that the Natsarim were first.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #108 on: March 25, 2014, 10:25:34 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #109 on: March 25, 2014, 10:27:33 AM »


Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise.  


Orthodox church services, hymns and prayers are stuffed with passages and whole sections from the Bible

Butchered versions from your greek TRANSLATIONS.

Quote
far more than any other Christian tradition. As for the Messiah, who do you say he is, Olivianus?

The messiah. Did you mean to ask another more specific question?



Greek translations? The Septuagint (LXX) is the oldest extant OT, and it is in Greek. The originals of the NT books were also written in Greek.

I was talking about the New Covenant. The original writings of the New Covenant were in hebrew:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/07/10/was-the-new-testament-originally-written-in-hebrew/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/08/01/excursus-on-the-semitic-roots-of-the-new-testament/
Luke and John, and all the Epistles, and Revelation, were originally written in Greek.

The "Hebrew" you cite is Aramaic. And it is irrelevant, as we don't have it.

Quote
As for the Messiah, I asked a straightforward question, which you have refused to answer. Here is is again: Who do you say the Messiah is, Olivianus?

No you didn't you want to play the metaphysics game with the hypostatic union don't you? Let's play. Yehoshuwah clearly stated that only the Father was the one God. John 17:1-4, 1 Cor. 8:6. Your God becoming flesh doctrine is pagan to the core. Yehoshuwah was produced out of the essence of the father. He is a derived being that pre-existed the creation.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.

Perhaps only to the Greek readers. There are no original manuscripts.
Since there are no original manuscripts, its language is irrelevant, as no reader can ipso facto read it.  One has to go by the text he has, not the one he conjectures.

Do you think the Jewish Apostles would have not written the Gospels for the Jewish people? Perhaps there is a reason the Greek NT is dated so far away after Jesus' departure.

Our earliest biography of Alexander the Great, who conquered all the known world, comes from writers who lived over two centuries after he died.  The latest Greek NT (i.e. John) written 70 years later by someone who knew Christ during His earthly ministry isn't "dated so are away," particularly given the prevalence of Greek writing in Palestine and among the rest of the Jews and Hebrews of the Roman World.

You are totally avoiding the massive documentation I have already given even from your own celebrated Historians that the original writings were in semitic languages.
Logged
nicodemus144
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 94


Always happy to chat.


« Reply #110 on: March 25, 2014, 10:41:26 AM »

Lord have mercy on us all.
Logged

“Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” -John 7:51 (NKJV)

I am investigating Orthodox Christianity.
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,726


Never cease to intercede for us, your children.


« Reply #111 on: March 25, 2014, 10:52:45 AM »

-Subscribed-
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,478


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #112 on: March 25, 2014, 11:11:30 AM »

This must be the most amazing, multi cultural, academic cross disciplinary conspiracy of all time. That has has to be the only answer. Centuries of multi continental, cross cultural conspiracy.

There are pages and pages of informative links by supporters and adherents to the OP's beliefs regarding these "Nastarim" on multiple search engines. Many, in fact, link to his detailed work.

But of the tens of thousands and thousands of accredited institutes of higher education worldwide, there seem to be no academic papers, cross references or citations or any serious mention at all. This is amazing in that "serious" peer reviewed papers exist and may easily be found after a cursory search on all manner of cults and alternative belief systems including witchcraft. No academics seem to have published a critique or analysis of the OP's works. This hidden "knowledge"  that the OP shares must be so dangerous to the world's status quo, that a vast conspiracy of worldwide silence spanning the centuries and the continent's involving scholars of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheistic, agnostic, Hindu,Buddhist, animist and any other "ism" exists. From devout believers to outraged atheists, the knowledge of the OP is not analyzed by seemingly any of them.   All the more amazing in that the aforesaid opposing schools of thought can't seem to agree upon much of anything. Amazing...

Or like all vast conspiracy theories, it is complete and utter nonsense.

It's  time for Christians to stop casting pearls before swine and simply ignore this thread.

Dan Brown writes far better fiction.

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: 37,866



« Reply #113 on: March 25, 2014, 11:18:56 AM »

You are totally avoiding the massive documentation I have already given even from your own celebrated Historians that the original writings were in semitic languages.

A pile of bricks does not an edifice make, let alone a pile of

When you can produce the original writings, get back to us.
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
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,506



« Reply #114 on: March 25, 2014, 11:21:55 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

This is good internetz.

LBK has never met a question should couldn't not answer. LBK, btw, is a woman.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 11:22:13 AM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
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: 37,866



« Reply #115 on: March 25, 2014, 11:23:44 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
No, the Jews lack the NT, the Kentucky Calvinists follow the Jews in removing the Anagignoskomena, and the Samaritans lack anything except the Torah.

So, which Bible is it?

And Marx is your sibling, not ours, no matter how much you try to deny your own.
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
nicodemus144
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 94


Always happy to chat.


« Reply #116 on: March 25, 2014, 11:24:09 AM »

This must be the most amazing, multi cultural, academic cross disciplinary conspiracy of all time. That has has to be the only answer. Centuries of multi continental, cross cultural conspiracy.

There are pages and pages of informative links by supporters and adherents to the OP's beliefs regarding these "Nastarim" on multiple search engines. Many, in fact, link to his detailed work.

But of the tens of thousands and thousands of accredited institutes of higher education worldwide, there seem to be no academic papers, cross references or citations or any serious mention at all. This is amazing in that "serious" peer reviewed papers exist and may easily be found after a cursory search on all manner of cults and alternative belief systems including witchcraft. No academics seem to have published a critique or analysis of the OP's works. This hidden "knowledge"  that the OP shares must be so dangerous to the world's status quo, that a vast conspiracy of worldwide silence spanning the centuries and the continent's involving scholars of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheistic, agnostic, Hindu,Buddhist, animist and any other "ism" exists. From devout believers to outraged atheists, the knowledge of the OP is not analyzed by seemingly any of them.   All the more amazing in that the aforesaid opposing schools of thought can't seem to agree upon much of anything. Amazing...

Or like all vast conspiracy theories, it is complete and utter nonsense.

It's  time for Christians to stop casting pearls before swine and simply ignore this thread.

Dan Brown writes far better fiction.

he is not the OP. i am the OP. my thread was not about any of this and has been significantly derailed.  please do not associate me or my questions with any of this. thanks.

as far as i'm concerned, my thread ended at reply #35 on page 1.
Logged

“Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” -John 7:51 (NKJV)

I am investigating Orthodox Christianity.
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #117 on: March 25, 2014, 11:25:25 AM »

This must be the most amazing, multi cultural, academic cross disciplinary conspiracy of all time. That has has to be the only answer. Centuries of multi continental, cross cultural conspiracy.

There are pages and pages of informative links by supporters and adherents to the OP's beliefs regarding these "Nastarim" on multiple search engines. Many, in fact, link to his detailed work.

But of the tens of thousands and thousands of accredited institutes of higher education worldwide, there seem to be no academic papers, cross references or citations or any serious mention at all. This is amazing in that "serious" peer reviewed papers exist and may easily be found after a cursory search on all manner of cults and alternative belief systems including witchcraft. No academics seem to have published a critique or analysis of the OP's works. This hidden "knowledge"  that the OP shares must be so dangerous to the world's status quo, that a vast conspiracy of worldwide silence spanning the centuries and the continent's involving scholars of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheistic, agnostic, Hindu,Buddhist, animist and any other "ism" exists. From devout believers to outraged atheists, the knowledge of the OP is not analyzed by seemingly any of them.   All the more amazing in that the aforesaid opposing schools of thought can't seem to agree upon much of anything. Amazing...

Or like all vast conspiracy theories, it is complete and utter nonsense.

It's  time for Christians to stop casting pearls before swine and simply ignore this thread.

Dan Brown writes far better fiction.



Seeing that my posts are not the OP, your statements can all be ignored as embarrassments.

Where is my conspiracy theory? Have I ever stated that I am presenting some occult conspiracy? I thought I was quoting standard literature. So Epiphanius, Jerome and Eusebius are not credible writers? And here this whole time I have had to deal with these exact historians from the Christian Church. I must have been hallucinating.
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,506



« Reply #118 on: March 25, 2014, 11:27:07 AM »

The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical.

Good luck developing an ontological account for a god who cares and is involved in the world without an ontology of economy as you put it.

I haven't gone back through this thread, could you offer a link or summation of what you believe to be a more adequate ontological account of the divine?

Thanks.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,478


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #119 on: March 25, 2014, 11:28:51 AM »

This must be the most amazing, multi cultural, academic cross disciplinary conspiracy of all time. That has has to be the only answer. Centuries of multi continental, cross cultural conspiracy.

There are pages and pages of informative links by supporters and adherents to the OP's beliefs regarding these "Nastarim" on multiple search engines. Many, in fact, link to his detailed work.

But of the tens of thousands and thousands of accredited institutes of higher education worldwide, there seem to be no academic papers, cross references or citations or any serious mention at all. This is amazing in that "serious" peer reviewed papers exist and may easily be found after a cursory search on all manner of cults and alternative belief systems including witchcraft. No academics seem to have published a critique or analysis of the OP's works. This hidden "knowledge"  that the OP shares must be so dangerous to the world's status quo, that a vast conspiracy of worldwide silence spanning the centuries and the continent's involving scholars of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheistic, agnostic, Hindu,Buddhist, animist and any other "ism" exists. From devout believers to outraged atheists, the knowledge of the OP is not analyzed by seemingly any of them.   All the more amazing in that the aforesaid opposing schools of thought can't seem to agree upon much of anything. Amazing...

Or like all vast conspiracy theories, it is complete and utter nonsense.

It's  time for Christians to stop casting pearls before swine and simply ignore this thread.

Dan Brown writes far better fiction.

he is not the OP. i am the OP. my thread was not about any of this and has been significantly derailed.  please do not associate me or my questions with any of this. thanks.

as far as i'm concerned, my thread ended at reply #35 on page 1.

I stand corrected and profoundly apologize for my error.
 
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: 37,866



« Reply #120 on: March 25, 2014, 11:29:55 AM »

“Drake makes the point that in the New Testament the titles “presbyter” literally elder, and “eposkopos,” overseerer or Bishop are used interchangeably. That is correct. However, the New Testament was written while the Apostles were still alive. Drake does not consider what happened when they began to die. We know from the example of St. Matthias, and historical documents such as the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Clement of Rome, and St. Irenaeus of Lyons that when the Apostles realized that Christ was not coming again during their lifetime, that they appointed successors, who were called Bishops to distinguish them from the Presbyters. Thus, although it is only hinted at in the New Testament, we know from the history of the Church that the Apostles left the leadership of the Church in the hands of Bishops who acted as their successors. The Apostles acted as Bishops over the Churches they founded. For example in Acts 14:23, refers to the ordination of priests for the Churches they founded by Sts. Paul and Barnabas; “And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”  The Greek word translaed “appointed” really means ordained, and “elders” is “presbyters” which is the source of our English word Priests.”

>>>The problem is Deut. 4:1-3, 12:29-32, does not allow innovation like that. The Bible teaches the regulative principle.
An assertion is not an argument.
That's right, which is how your assertion in bold fails as an argument. Unless you are a Samaritan, in which you haven't added the books of Joshua and thereafter in violation of Deuteronomy.  But you then would have other problems.

The regulative principle: Lev 10:1-2 [obj. Exo 30:9 C.R. Lev 16:12 He took coals from an non-commanded source and not from the Altar], Duet 12:29-32 [obj. Temple/Tabernacle sacrificial service ans. Mat 15:7, Jer 7:31], Duet 4:2 [All of life], Jer 7:31, Num 15:39, Mat 15:7, Col 2:20-23 kjv "will worship".  Tabernacle Exo 25:9 ; Temple 1 Chron 28:11-19, 2 Chron 29:25.
First, get your story straight: you deny Christianity but then quote its NT as Scripture.

Once you have gotten your scattered thoughts straight on what is scripture, get back to me.

The writings of the Gospels and Rav Shaul are Natsarim documents not christian. Your religion began with the false apostles and Justin Martyr. It has already been admitted that the Natsarim were first.

The first sect, yes, they were among the first sects.  But the Church preceded all sects, starting with the Messiah and His Apostles, whose Apostolic Truth Justin Martyr defended.

So, the Gospels and Writings of St. Paul documented in the King James Bible or the Statenbijbel-are they inspired and infallible as (at least) the Torah of the Masorites, yes or no?

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
nicodemus144
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 94


Always happy to chat.


« Reply #121 on: March 25, 2014, 11:30:23 AM »

This must be the most amazing, multi cultural, academic cross disciplinary conspiracy of all time. That has has to be the only answer. Centuries of multi continental, cross cultural conspiracy.

There are pages and pages of informative links by supporters and adherents to the OP's beliefs regarding these "Nastarim" on multiple search engines. Many, in fact, link to his detailed work.

But of the tens of thousands and thousands of accredited institutes of higher education worldwide, there seem to be no academic papers, cross references or citations or any serious mention at all. This is amazing in that "serious" peer reviewed papers exist and may easily be found after a cursory search on all manner of cults and alternative belief systems including witchcraft. No academics seem to have published a critique or analysis of the OP's works. This hidden "knowledge"  that the OP shares must be so dangerous to the world's status quo, that a vast conspiracy of worldwide silence spanning the centuries and the continent's involving scholars of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheistic, agnostic, Hindu,Buddhist, animist and any other "ism" exists. From devout believers to outraged atheists, the knowledge of the OP is not analyzed by seemingly any of them.   All the more amazing in that the aforesaid opposing schools of thought can't seem to agree upon much of anything. Amazing...

Or like all vast conspiracy theories, it is complete and utter nonsense.

It's  time for Christians to stop casting pearls before swine and simply ignore this thread.

Dan Brown writes far better fiction.

he is not the OP. i am the OP. my thread was not about any of this and has been significantly derailed.  please do not associate me or my questions with any of this. thanks.

as far as i'm concerned, my thread ended at reply #35 on page 1.

I stand corrected and profoundly apologize for my error.
 

thank you kindly. God bless.
Logged

“Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” -John 7:51 (NKJV)

I am investigating Orthodox Christianity.
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #122 on: March 25, 2014, 11:30:50 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
No, the Jews lack the NT


Quote
the Kentucky Calvinists follow the Jews in removing the Anagignoskomena, and the Samaritans lack anything except the Torah.


Tell me what bible you believe and I will show you you don't believe it.


Quote
So, which Bible is it?

All of them. At least ones that have some serious scholarship to them. Pick one and I'll show you you don't believe it.

Quote
And Marx is your sibling, not ours, no matter how much you try to deny your own.

Ad hoc. Why do you think this is an argument? Make an argument dude.

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: 37,866



« Reply #123 on: March 25, 2014, 11:32:29 AM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Your religion teaches the rejection of that same religion:

"Canon XXIX.

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians.  But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.viii.vii.iii.xxxiv.html

Your religion is a calculated rejection of the bible and the jewish people, messiah being one of those jewish people you Christians despise. 

What Bible?

Most of them. Pick one. The most used christian bible I am aware of is the nasb. Would you like me to refute your religion with the nasb or another version?
Not translation.  I'm not limited to English, so I don't care what English translation you use.  I mean version: Samaritan?  Masoretic? Septuagint?  Vulgate?....

If I had to choose from one of those it would be the LXX.
That include the New Testament: Nestle-Aland, UBS, etc.? As inspired, that is.
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
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,833



« Reply #124 on: March 25, 2014, 11:33:55 AM »

while i appreciate good inquiry, i'd really appreciate it if further discussion of Drake could occur in another thread and not here.

thanks!

I understand that you consider that it is at this point that your thread ended and others carried on for their own purposes.

First, I am sorry that I have come in late. Second, I do want to recomment a book that is fascinating in more than one way. It was written by two Protestant theologians but ends up endorsing the Eastern Orthodox view as expressed by Archpriest John Behr, Dean of the Saint Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary, at page 28 (or Kindle location 936) of the Heresy of Orthodoxy by Andreas Kostenberger and Michael Kruger.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
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: 37,866



« Reply #125 on: March 25, 2014, 11:34:13 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)









Your essence and energies doctrine is self contradictory. The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical. The fact that the energies could have been different is irrelevant. Either way is an eternal economy.

You don't believe that God is light. You think God imported an economical action.

"On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)"

>>>You totally avoided my argument. Anyway, after I abandoned the trinity I abandoned my view of images of Messiah. I don't have a problem with images of messiah now. He is not the one God. Make as many images of him as you like.
If He were not "I AM" as it says in the icon, we shouldn't make any image of Him.  Says so in Deuteronomy.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #126 on: March 25, 2014, 11:35:34 AM »

Quote
Christ's baptism example is totally ad hoc as are the other examples.

On what basis are they ad hoc, and why would their being ad hoc be significant?

BTW, still waiting for your answers on the identity of the Messiah and on the Incarnation.

Those passages nowhere say the the one God is one being and three persons nor do they imply it.

The Messiah's name was Yehoshuwah. He was a caused being that pre-existed the creation. There was no incarnation. God did not be come man. A caused being that pre-existed the creation became man. 
So you repeat the Jehovah Witnesses errors as 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
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #127 on: March 25, 2014, 11:38:47 AM »

The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical.

Good luck developing an ontological account for a god who cares and is involved in the world without an ontology of economy as you put it.

There it is! You just admitted it. The energies are ontological, not the activity of a being.


Quote
I haven't gone back through this thread, could you offer a link or summation of what you believe to be a more adequate ontological account of the divine?

Ontological account? That is ambiguous. Ask a specific question and you will get a specific answer. Let's see what game is he going to play:

1. Oh we all know he wants to talk about ads right? No I don't believe in ads but you do! You think you don't but you do. Your construction terminates on a monad just like everyone else's pagan construction.  

Anyway here are two links where I deal with the heavy stuff:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/12/22/reply-to-edward-feser-why-is-there-anything-at-all-its-simple/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/12/04/is-divine-simplicity-necessary-for-yahwehs-aseity/
Logged
nicodemus144
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian (Catechumen)
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 94


Always happy to chat.


« Reply #128 on: March 25, 2014, 11:39:29 AM »

.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 11:43:40 AM by nicodemus144 » Logged

“Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?” -John 7:51 (NKJV)

I am investigating Orthodox Christianity.
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: 37,866



« Reply #129 on: March 25, 2014, 11:40:45 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
No, the Jews lack the NT
Quote
the Kentucky Calvinists follow the Jews in removing the Anagignoskomena, and the Samaritans lack anything except the Torah.
Tell me what bible you believe and I will show you you don't believe it.
Evading the question:which do you believe in?

As for myself and my household, we follow the Lord:
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp
Quote
So, which Bible is it?

All of them. At least ones that have some serious scholarship to them. Pick one and I'll show you you don't believe it.
All of them don't agree, which means you believe in none of them.
Quote
And Marx is your sibling, not ours, no matter how much you try to deny your own.

Ad hoc. Why do you think this is an argument? Make an argument dude.
you first.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 11:41:13 AM by ialmisry » 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
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #130 on: March 25, 2014, 11:42:18 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)









Your essence and energies doctrine is self contradictory. The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical. The fact that the energies could have been different is irrelevant. Either way is an eternal economy.

You don't believe that God is light. You think God imported an economical action.

"On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)"

>>>You totally avoided my argument. Anyway, after I abandoned the trinity I abandoned my view of images of Messiah. I don't have a problem with images of messiah now. He is not the one God. Make as many images of him as you like.
If He were not "I AM" as it says in the icon, we shouldn't make any image of Him.  Says so in Deuteronomy.

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 11:42:56 AM by Olivianus » 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: 37,866



« Reply #131 on: March 25, 2014, 11:42:50 AM »

I must have been hallucinating.
now that's a self evident truth.  Too bad the speaker lacks the self awareness to see it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #132 on: March 25, 2014, 11:44:56 AM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?
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
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,506



« Reply #133 on: March 25, 2014, 11:46:42 AM »

The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical.

Good luck developing an ontological account for a god who cares and is involved in the world without an ontology of economy as you put it.

There it is! You just admitted it. The energies are ontological, not the activity of a being.


Quote
I haven't gone back through this thread, could you offer a link or summation of what you believe to be a more adequate ontological account of the divine?

Ontological account? That is ambiguous. Ask a specific question and you will get a specific answer. Let's see what game is he going to play:

1. Oh we all know he wants to talk about ads right? No I don't believe in ads but you do! You think you don't but you do. Your construction terminates on a monad just like everyone else's pagan construction.  

Anyway here are two links where I deal with the heavy stuff:

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/12/22/reply-to-edward-feser-why-is-there-anything-at-all-its-simple/

http://drakeshelton.com/2013/12/04/is-divine-simplicity-necessary-for-yahwehs-aseity/

Dude, what you going on about? ads, frankly I hate them. I don't know how people use the internet without an ad blocker.

I'll take a look at your links though.

By the way, what do you know about my constructions? Not everyone here is as uninterested or aggressive toward the unusual. Calm down a little. Stop responding with such hysteria. IOW, don't be so Drake.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 11:47:08 AM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #134 on: March 25, 2014, 11:47:10 AM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
No, the Jews lack the NT
Quote
the Kentucky Calvinists follow the Jews in removing the Anagignoskomena, and the Samaritans lack anything except the Torah.
Tell me what bible you believe and I will show you you don't believe it.
Evading the question:which do you believe in?

As for myself and my household, we follow the Lord:
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp
Quote
So, which Bible is it?

All of them. At least ones that have some serious scholarship to them. Pick one and I'll show you you don't believe it.
All of them don't agree, which means you believe in none of them.

No, all of them are not jointly exhaustive. There is a difference. There is a huge degree of agreement among them, so much so that they teach the same story. Which ever one you pick the issues are the same:

Quote
The Renewed Covenant of Jer.31:31-32 will be replaced by Christianity’s New Testament.  The Nation of Israel will be replaced by the Gentile Church. The Hebrew Gospels and the Hebrew writings of Rav Shaul,[5] will be replaced by Greek manuscripts.  The Unitarianism of the Tanach will be replaced by the pagan Triune Godhead of Christianity, directly contradicted by the Torah,[6] which ultimately worships a monad huperousia pursuant to Plotinus’ Enneads 6 and 9. Following from this the Hebrew names of the creator and the messiah, Yahuwah and Yehoshuwah will be replaced by a Generic title: God, and the name of the Greek deity Iasos later to be translated Jesus. The Torah and all the hundreds of relational, political and economic laws revealed by Yahuwah himself will be replaced by pagan Monasticism, Asceticism, and Feudalism. The Sabbath day, which was sanctified and blessed by Yahuwah in the second chapter of the Bible as an integral part of the created order, will be replaced by the day of the Sun. The annual Sabbaths of the fall and spring feasts will be replaced by the Catholic Church’s liturgical calendar, celebrating the Bohemian pagan Christmas, the pagan celebrations of Astarte and her mystical Easter egg, and the pagan celebration of Halloween. The Protestant Christians, following Rome’s Replacement theology, still replace these feasts with their innovation known as The Lord’s Supper. Protestant Christians also follow the Catholic Catechism’s replacement of circumcision with Baptism.[7]  Following from this, the Creator’s calendar, which measures years by the ripe barley, the abib, and holding to Geocentrism, will be replaced by the Solar calendar of Rome and Jesuit Heliocentrism with the Gregorian Calendar. This religion would go on to justify prayer and worship to idols and statues and trinkets and a legion of other grotesque and abominable insanities explicitly condemned in the Torah. The past 150 years has seen an even bigger failure in Christianity to maintain any kind of religious order in Western Civilization following the Communist revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. Without the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church, the baseless, arbitrary theology of Christianity fell like a stack of dry leaves in the face of Marx and Engels’ wicked brilliance. The Torah established a Theocratic Republic[8] which killed anyone who prophesied falsely and promoted worship of another God.[9] This is a direct contradiction to the allegiance modern Christians have to the French Revolution’s doctrines of absolute religious toleration and freedom of speech. The Torah taught that the racial tribe of the Hebrews was more significant than any other people on the earth.[10]  Paul repeats this racial supremacy in his writings,[11] acknowledging the God-given racial privileges of the Jewish people.[12] Modern Christians reject this with their belief that all men are created equal. The Torah, though bestowing equal administrations of justice,[13] affirmed supremacies of privilege and franchise. Yahuwah gave Levites privileges and responsibilities no other class had. However, they were not given franchises other classes enjoyed.[14] The first-born son is given an unearned portion of inheritance.[15] Not only is  slavery condoned in the Bible, a person of Hebrew blood could only be enslaved for six years while a person of foreign blood could be held in hereditary slavery.[16] No mechanistic equality. The Gibeonites, though given administrations of justice,[17] were second class citizens in the Nation of Israel.[18] Women are regarded as the property of either their husband or father,[19] could only inherit property if there was no male heir[20] and are as a gender clearly referred to as ontologically subordinate to men.[21] Women are also to hold no teaching office in the religious assemblies.[22] Modern Christian women especially despise the Bible’s teaching on Head Coverings.[23] Paul teaches in Rom. 13:1-5 that Governments are established by Yahuwah. Modern Christians, in direct defiance of the Bible, following the French thinkers, say that Governments are established by the people. The Bible also condones the right of the state to physically enforce morality on the population.[24]  While some Fascist Christians do believe this, their Fascism is far too liberal to qualify for a true Bible-believing Philosophy. And finally, the Bible explicitly condemns the modern banking system, which Christian Capitalism glories in, with its prohibition against usury.[25] Thus, as we have seen, Christianity has stayed fundamentally consistent, since the 4th century and John Chrysostom’s Eight Homilies Against the Jews, in demonizing and rejecting everything Jewish. Christians, without any doubt, truly hate the Bible.

http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/


Quote
you first.

I already did. Your pelagian anthropology states that a hypostasis cannot suffer any degree of compulsion that is necessary for patriarchy. I already had this conversation.
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #135 on: March 25, 2014, 11:50:54 AM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Actually? Continuum fallacy. There is enough in the christian bibles to get to the truth.

"Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?"

>>>Yes, in a semitic language and their writings were suppressed to avoid the obvious implication: Hebrew Racial Supremacy. 
Logged
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #136 on: March 25, 2014, 11:53:53 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)









Your essence and energies doctrine is self contradictory. The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical. The fact that the energies could have been different is irrelevant. Either way is an eternal economy.

You don't believe that God is light. You think God imported an economical action.

"On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)"

>>>You totally avoided my argument. Anyway, after I abandoned the trinity I abandoned my view of images of Messiah. I don't have a problem with images of messiah now. He is not the one God. Make as many images of him as you like.

Quote
>>>You totally avoided my argument.

Few things. First, you don't have an argument. Second, you avoided my response to your 'argument'.
Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #137 on: March 25, 2014, 11:56:47 AM »

As for the Panarion you quote, the Nazarenes deny the Holy Trinity. This is quite enough to show them as heretics, which is exactly what St Epiphanius was doing.

I reject the Trinity and coming from you people I take it as a compliment that you think I'm a heretic.

Then what are you doing on a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christianity, and Orthodox Christianity at that? You won't convince anyone here of your heresies and crackpot ideas.

I was being attacked on this forum and I kept getting referrals from this page because I have written the most extensive refutation of Eastern Orthodoxy ever penned and so since my work was being discussed I found it immediately relevant to show up.

A pre-schooler knows more about Orthodoxy than you do.

In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)









Your essence and energies doctrine is self contradictory. The doctrine of the uncreated energies means that God is ontologically economical. The fact that the energies could have been different is irrelevant. Either way is an eternal economy.

You don't believe that God is light. You think God imported an economical action.

"On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)"

>>>You totally avoided my argument. Anyway, after I abandoned the trinity I abandoned my view of images of Messiah. I don't have a problem with images of messiah now. He is not the one God. Make as many images of him as you like.

Quote
>>>You totally avoided my argument.

Few things. First, you don't have an argument. Second, you avoided my response to your 'argument'.

Which part?
Logged
DeniseDenise
Tiredness personified
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catechumen no more!
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,054


What curls do on a bad hair day!


« Reply #138 on: March 25, 2014, 11:58:29 AM »

Whatever you all do....could you stop requoteing everything with the darn pictures.......those of us watching the tennis match are tired of scrolling.   laugh
Logged

Please secure your own oxygen mask before assisting other passengers.
xOrthodox4Christx
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant (Inquirer)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Christianity
Posts: 3,307



« Reply #139 on: March 25, 2014, 11:58:42 AM »

Quote
Which part?
Quote
In one point (Point 46) you say that God is seen as "Divine Darkness" according to Lossky, then you quote the Bible to say "God is Light".

The problem is that you conflate what Psuedo Dionysios the Aeropagite says (not Lossky), and what the Bible says; as if they contradict, when there is no contradiction between the two. In fact, Orthodox affirm God is Light, the entire argument of St. Gregory Palamas against Balaam is evidence of that.

Those who deny that God is light, and that God's light and energy did not shine and emanate from Christ on Mt. Tabor are anathema in the Orthodox Church.

On another point you stated that Icons are Nestorian. (Point 43) Which is... somewhat true. Nestorians do use Icons. However, you take this to mean that somehow, Christ's Divinity is not represented in the Icon and only his humanity is. To which I reply, have you EVER looked at an icon? (if you still cannot see Divinity represented here, just look at the Halo with the Greek o on "I AM" on it.)







Logged

"Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth.... While there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." (Eugene Debs)
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #140 on: March 25, 2014, 11:59:56 AM »

Drake, have you seen this thread? Ralph has a much different view of early Christian history and what-not than you do, and likewise puts a lot of time into his ideas. I wonder which of you has a better grasp on the subject.
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: 37,866



« Reply #141 on: March 25, 2014, 12:00:30 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Actually? Continuum fallacy. There is enough in the christian bibles to get to the truth.

"Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?"

>>>Yes, in a semitic language and their writings were suppressed to avoid the obvious implication: Hebrew Racial Supremacy. 
Then you have no NT, and hence you do not believe in "all of them."

so you a Jew or a Samaritan?
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
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #142 on: March 25, 2014, 12:02:58 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Actually? Continuum fallacy. There is enough in the christian bibles to get to the truth.

"Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?"

>>>Yes, in a semitic language and their writings were suppressed to avoid the obvious implication: Hebrew Racial Supremacy. 
Then you have no NT, and hence you do not believe in "all of them."

If you mean that in order for man to have revelation that he has to have the original texts you sir are delusional.

Quote
so you a Jew or a Samaritan?

I am a white anglo saxon gentile
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: 37,866



« Reply #143 on: March 25, 2014, 12:03:59 PM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
No, the Jews lack the NT
Quote
the Kentucky Calvinists follow the Jews in removing the Anagignoskomena, and the Samaritans lack anything except the Torah.
Tell me what bible you believe and I will show you you don't believe it.
Evading the question:which do you believe in?

As for myself and my household, we follow the Lord:
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp
Quote
So, which Bible is it?

All of them. At least ones that have some serious scholarship to them. Pick one and I'll show you you don't believe it.
All of them don't agree, which means you believe in none of them.

No, all of them are not jointly exhaustive. There is a difference. There is a huge degree of agreement among them, so much so that they teach the same story. Which ever one you pick the issues are the same:
You devote your website to saying that Christianity and Judaism (and by extension, Samaritanism) do not teach the same thing.

Do make up your mind.
Quote
The Renewed Covenant of Jer.31:31-32 will be replaced by Christianity’s New Testament.  The Nation of Israel will be replaced by the Gentile Church. The Hebrew Gospels and the Hebrew writings of Rav Shaul,[5] will be replaced by Greek manuscripts.  The Unitarianism of the Tanach will be replaced by the pagan Triune Godhead of Christianity, directly contradicted by the Torah,[6] which ultimately worships a monad huperousia pursuant to Plotinus’ Enneads 6 and 9. Following from this the Hebrew names of the creator and the messiah, Yahuwah and Yehoshuwah will be replaced by a Generic title: God, and the name of the Greek deity Iasos later to be translated Jesus. The Torah and all the hundreds of relational, political and economic laws revealed by Yahuwah himself will be replaced by pagan Monasticism, Asceticism, and Feudalism. The Sabbath day, which was sanctified and blessed by Yahuwah in the second chapter of the Bible as an integral part of the created order, will be replaced by the day of the Sun. The annual Sabbaths of the fall and spring feasts will be replaced by the Catholic Church’s liturgical calendar, celebrating the Bohemian pagan Christmas, the pagan celebrations of Astarte and her mystical Easter egg, and the pagan celebration of Halloween. The Protestant Christians, following Rome’s Replacement theology, still replace these feasts with their innovation known as The Lord’s Supper. Protestant Christians also follow the Catholic Catechism’s replacement of circumcision with Baptism.[7]  Following from this, the Creator’s calendar, which measures years by the ripe barley, the abib, and holding to Geocentrism, will be replaced by the Solar calendar of Rome and Jesuit Heliocentrism with the Gregorian Calendar. This religion would go on to justify prayer and worship to idols and statues and trinkets and a legion of other grotesque and abominable insanities explicitly condemned in the Torah. The past 150 years has seen an even bigger failure in Christianity to maintain any kind of religious order in Western Civilization following the Communist revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. Without the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church, the baseless, arbitrary theology of Christianity fell like a stack of dry leaves in the face of Marx and Engels’ wicked brilliance. The Torah established a Theocratic Republic[8] which killed anyone who prophesied falsely and promoted worship of another God.[9] This is a direct contradiction to the allegiance modern Christians have to the French Revolution’s doctrines of absolute religious toleration and freedom of speech. The Torah taught that the racial tribe of the Hebrews was more significant than any other people on the earth.[10]  Paul repeats this racial supremacy in his writings,[11] acknowledging the God-given racial privileges of the Jewish people.[12] Modern Christians reject this with their belief that all men are created equal. The Torah, though bestowing equal administrations of justice,[13] affirmed supremacies of privilege and franchise. Yahuwah gave Levites privileges and responsibilities no other class had. However, they were not given franchises other classes enjoyed.[14] The first-born son is given an unearned portion of inheritance.[15] Not only is  slavery condoned in the Bible, a person of Hebrew blood could only be enslaved for six years while a person of foreign blood could be held in hereditary slavery.[16] No mechanistic equality. The Gibeonites, though given administrations of justice,[17] were second class citizens in the Nation of Israel.[18] Women are regarded as the property of either their husband or father,[19] could only inherit property if there was no male heir[20] and are as a gender clearly referred to as ontologically subordinate to men.[21] Women are also to hold no teaching office in the religious assemblies.[22] Modern Christian women especially despise the Bible’s teaching on Head Coverings.[23] Paul teaches in Rom. 13:1-5 that Governments are established by Yahuwah. Modern Christians, in direct defiance of the Bible, following the French thinkers, say that Governments are established by the people. The Bible also condones the right of the state to physically enforce morality on the population.[24]  While some Fascist Christians do believe this, their Fascism is far too liberal to qualify for a true Bible-believing Philosophy. And finally, the Bible explicitly condemns the modern banking system, which Christian Capitalism glories in, with its prohibition against usury.[25] Thus, as we have seen, Christianity has stayed fundamentally consistent, since the 4th century and John Chrysostom’s Eight Homilies Against the Jews, in demonizing and rejecting everything Jewish. Christians, without any doubt, truly hate the Bible.

http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/


Quote
you first.

I already did. Your pelagian anthropology states that a hypostasis cannot suffer any degree of compulsion that is necessary for patriarchy. I already had this conversation.

evidently with yourself.  You know, you go blind that way.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #144 on: March 25, 2014, 12:06:31 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Actually? Continuum fallacy. There is enough in the christian bibles to get to the truth.

"Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?"

>>>Yes, in a semitic language and their writings were suppressed to avoid the obvious implication: Hebrew Racial Supremacy. 
Then you have no NT, and hence you do not believe in "all of them."

If you mean that in order for man to have revelation that he has to have the original texts you sir are delusional.
He has to have some text, not some delusions of a text.
Quote
so you a Jew or a Samaritan?

I am a white anglo saxon gentile
in which case the Jewish and Samaritan Scriptures have nothing for you, and you can be ignored in your obscurity.
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
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #145 on: March 25, 2014, 12:11:09 PM »

What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.
Marx as an individual wasn't raised in Orthodoxy, but in the Calvinist Evangelical church of Prussia.

What Bible is it that you believe in?

Marx held your pelagian anthropology as I have already described in detail.

The different versions of the bible are the same book.
No, the Jews lack the NT
Quote
the Kentucky Calvinists follow the Jews in removing the Anagignoskomena, and the Samaritans lack anything except the Torah.
Tell me what bible you believe and I will show you you don't believe it.
Evading the question:which do you believe in?

As for myself and my household, we follow the Lord:
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp
Quote
So, which Bible is it?

All of them. At least ones that have some serious scholarship to them. Pick one and I'll show you you don't believe it.
All of them don't agree, which means you believe in none of them.

No, all of them are not jointly exhaustive. There is a difference. There is a huge degree of agreement among them, so much so that they teach the same story. Which ever one you pick the issues are the same:
You devote your website to saying that Christianity and Judaism (and by extension, Samaritanism) do not teach the same thing.

Do make up your mind.
Quote
The Renewed Covenant of Jer.31:31-32 will be replaced by Christianity’s New Testament.  The Nation of Israel will be replaced by the Gentile Church. The Hebrew Gospels and the Hebrew writings of Rav Shaul,[5] will be replaced by Greek manuscripts.  The Unitarianism of the Tanach will be replaced by the pagan Triune Godhead of Christianity, directly contradicted by the Torah,[6] which ultimately worships a monad huperousia pursuant to Plotinus’ Enneads 6 and 9. Following from this the Hebrew names of the creator and the messiah, Yahuwah and Yehoshuwah will be replaced by a Generic title: God, and the name of the Greek deity Iasos later to be translated Jesus. The Torah and all the hundreds of relational, political and economic laws revealed by Yahuwah himself will be replaced by pagan Monasticism, Asceticism, and Feudalism. The Sabbath day, which was sanctified and blessed by Yahuwah in the second chapter of the Bible as an integral part of the created order, will be replaced by the day of the Sun. The annual Sabbaths of the fall and spring feasts will be replaced by the Catholic Church’s liturgical calendar, celebrating the Bohemian pagan Christmas, the pagan celebrations of Astarte and her mystical Easter egg, and the pagan celebration of Halloween. The Protestant Christians, following Rome’s Replacement theology, still replace these feasts with their innovation known as The Lord’s Supper. Protestant Christians also follow the Catholic Catechism’s replacement of circumcision with Baptism.[7]  Following from this, the Creator’s calendar, which measures years by the ripe barley, the abib, and holding to Geocentrism, will be replaced by the Solar calendar of Rome and Jesuit Heliocentrism with the Gregorian Calendar. This religion would go on to justify prayer and worship to idols and statues and trinkets and a legion of other grotesque and abominable insanities explicitly condemned in the Torah. The past 150 years has seen an even bigger failure in Christianity to maintain any kind of religious order in Western Civilization following the Communist revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries. Without the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church, the baseless, arbitrary theology of Christianity fell like a stack of dry leaves in the face of Marx and Engels’ wicked brilliance. The Torah established a Theocratic Republic[8] which killed anyone who prophesied falsely and promoted worship of another God.[9] This is a direct contradiction to the allegiance modern Christians have to the French Revolution’s doctrines of absolute religious toleration and freedom of speech. The Torah taught that the racial tribe of the Hebrews was more significant than any other people on the earth.[10]  Paul repeats this racial supremacy in his writings,[11] acknowledging the God-given racial privileges of the Jewish people.[12] Modern Christians reject this with their belief that all men are created equal. The Torah, though bestowing equal administrations of justice,[13] affirmed supremacies of privilege and franchise. Yahuwah gave Levites privileges and responsibilities no other class had. However, they were not given franchises other classes enjoyed.[14] The first-born son is given an unearned portion of inheritance.[15] Not only is  slavery condoned in the Bible, a person of Hebrew blood could only be enslaved for six years while a person of foreign blood could be held in hereditary slavery.[16] No mechanistic equality. The Gibeonites, though given administrations of justice,[17] were second class citizens in the Nation of Israel.[18] Women are regarded as the property of either their husband or father,[19] could only inherit property if there was no male heir[20] and are as a gender clearly referred to as ontologically subordinate to men.[21] Women are also to hold no teaching office in the religious assemblies.[22] Modern Christian women especially despise the Bible’s teaching on Head Coverings.[23] Paul teaches in Rom. 13:1-5 that Governments are established by Yahuwah. Modern Christians, in direct defiance of the Bible, following the French thinkers, say that Governments are established by the people. The Bible also condones the right of the state to physically enforce morality on the population.[24]  While some Fascist Christians do believe this, their Fascism is far too liberal to qualify for a true Bible-believing Philosophy. And finally, the Bible explicitly condemns the modern banking system, which Christian Capitalism glories in, with its prohibition against usury.[25] Thus, as we have seen, Christianity has stayed fundamentally consistent, since the 4th century and John Chrysostom’s Eight Homilies Against the Jews, in demonizing and rejecting everything Jewish. Christians, without any doubt, truly hate the Bible.

http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/


Quote
you first.

I already did. Your pelagian anthropology states that a hypostasis cannot suffer any degree of compulsion that is necessary for patriarchy. I already had this conversation.

evidently with yourself.  You know, you go blind that way.

It was around post 68
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #146 on: March 25, 2014, 12:13:28 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Actually? Continuum fallacy. There is enough in the christian bibles to get to the truth.

"Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?"

>>>Yes, in a semitic language and their writings were suppressed to avoid the obvious implication: Hebrew Racial Supremacy. 
Then you have no NT, and hence you do not believe in "all of them."

If you mean that in order for man to have revelation that he has to have the original texts you sir are delusional.
He has to have some text, not some delusions of a text.

There are over 5000 that I study regularly.

Quote
in which case the Jewish and Samaritan Scriptures have nothing for you, and you can be ignored in your obscurity.

More assertions. I am still waiting for the list of arguments I have made to be answered.

Start here: http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/
Logged
Olivianus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Judaizer
Jurisdiction: Kentucky
Posts: 50



WWW
« Reply #147 on: March 25, 2014, 12:14:08 PM »

I am still waiting for the list of arguments I have made to be answered.

Start here: http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 12:14:18 PM by Olivianus » Logged
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #148 on: March 25, 2014, 12:15:58 PM »

The preaching of Christ seems to focus more on charity and well doing, well being, socialism, humanity, morality like that is the Church, not some institution. The institutional religion is what condemned and murdered Christ and against whom Christ focussed most of his refutation.

Whether the Jews held it up properly or not, didn't Christ institute that same religion?

Then why aren't Christians, Jews?

The Jews of yesterday are Christians. The Jews of today are not.

Christianity has some concepts that are totally foreign and antijewish.

That is an honest Christian there.

Based on Rashi's 11th century teachings; and not on the Apostle's 1st century teachings.

You don't believe the apostle's 1st century teachings:

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Rom. 7:12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

Rom. 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom. 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

1 John 3:4 Sin is a transgression of the law


I can give you a lot of NT quote showing that the Law has changed.

I think the Apostles were confused.

Judaism is an offshoot of paganism. Christianity is an offshoot of Judaism...
Christianity isn't an offshot Judaism, nor Judaism an offshoot of paganism, so I can't put much stock in your knowledge of paganism.

Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples. Abraham himself according to the Bible came from the heathens. Some archeologists say that the jews were actually a caananite nomadic tribe and that Yahweh was at some point(initially?) heathen caananite deity and his wife was Astarte. The Documentary Hypothesis says the "Torah" "Pentateuch" was not written by Moses but had multiple authors. Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values. It's clear history that before there ever was a "Judaism" there was "Paganism" and that "Christianity" sprang forth from "Judaism". Judaism seems to have some syncretic pagan parts and for sure Christianity has syncretic Jewish teachings and Christianity came forth from the background of Judaism and the religion of the Jews.
I haven't asked you to barf up more rancid bites of pseudoscholarship that some "experts" have prechewed for you, such as "Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples."  For one thing, "most" =/= "all."

Nor is "none" as you asserted.

Quote
The Bible says that Abraham came from the heathen? Oh, where does it say that?

Abraham's departure from Ur. We are later told that Abraham's relatives in Ur were worshipping idols(Rachel stealing the idols of he fathers). You can find Abraham's departure from Ur in the Jewish Scriptures, Christian Scriptures and Muslims Scriptures. Make your pick.

Quote
Yes, I'm aware of the theory of a Yahweh-Astarte pair, and the meagre evidence twisted into such a narrative.  The Biblical narrative of the Hebrews falling into Canaanite paganism and assimilating the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob into it fits better.

Scholars say that most of the Tanakh was written during the Babylonian captivity to explain the Jewish condition.

Quote
The documentary hypothesis is for one thing, plural: its partisans can't agree amongst themselves on it.  Since the Pentateuch/Torah doesn't say that Moses wrote it, there doesn't seem to be much point on arguing it.

Then you got a problem. Because if Moses didn't write it then who did? There is little to no proof of the historicy of Moses or the existence of Israel in Egypt and the Exodus. What basis do you have for the inspiration of the Torah?

Quote
"Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values." I know that they don't appeal to the smug who think they know better, and don't want anything prove the contrary.  Atheism-the opiate of the dissolute.

Actually the Judeo-Christian-Islamic theology is the one who appeals to smugs and trolls who find justification of criminal, obscure acts in their religion.

Considering that the laws are primitive and cannot be universally bind as ethical and that it had many authors and editor, what makes your "torah" inspired and authoritative? Where it's her authority drawed from?

Quote
Since Judaism dates from the time of Christ, and their Torah warns them of the Canaanite paganism over a thousand years before that, of course paganism (some form of it at least) predates it.

What Torah? Didn't you say that Moses did not write the Torah? According to the Documentary Hypothesis the Torah was compiled and finished mostly around the 6th century BCE. The Caananite religion preceded that, and all pagan religions did. Plus there were many "scrolls of the laws". On the time of King Josiah the High Priest Hilkiah "discovered" a scroll of the law they knew nothing about and that they were transgressing at that moment. As I said no proof of an Israeli migration according to archaeology. So what authority does the Torah hold then? Where does this authority come from? From her editors, redactors, etc? Smiley "How do you say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly he made it falsely; the pen of the scribes made it a lie."(Jer 8:Cool


Quote
Since the New Testament predates the Talmud, how did the former's Christianity "spring forth from" the latter's Judaism?

Since the OT precedes the NT, Christianity is a sect of Judaism, as your bible says "We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect" Acts 24:5
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #149 on: March 25, 2014, 12:19:04 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Why don't you answer that one. Did they? Smiley
Logged

"I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men."

Robert Green Ingersoll
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #150 on: March 25, 2014, 12:24:30 PM »

What Torah? Didn't you say that Moses did not write the Torah? According to the Documentary Hypothesis the Torah was compiled and finished mostly around the 6th century BCE. The Caananite religion preceded that, and all pagan religions did. Plus there were many "scrolls of the laws". On the time of King Josiah the High Priest Hilkiah "discovered" a scroll of the law they knew nothing about and that they were transgressing at that moment. As I said no proof of an Israeli migration according to archaeology. So what authority does the Torah hold then? Where does this authority come from? From her editors, redactors, etc? Smiley "How do you say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly he made it falsely; the pen of the scribes made it a lie."(Jer 8:Cool

Have you really not encountered engagement with Biblical criticism outside of fundamentalist responses?

See Vatican II's Dei Verbum, James Kugel's How to Read the Bible, etc. for an idea of how the Church, as well as ancient Rabbis and Fathers perceived, read, and interpreted these texts. Their use as an ecclesiastical document does not hinge on their absolute uniform historicity, nor their authors being those as traditionally understood, nor the accuracy of texts as historical narratives (e.g. the etiological accounts of Cain, the Israeli-Canaanite "division," etc.), and therefore not even authorial intent.

From Dei Verbum:

Quote
12. However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, (6) the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.

Emphasis mine.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2014, 12:25:25 PM by Nephi » 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: 37,866



« Reply #151 on: March 25, 2014, 02:10:31 PM »

I haven't asked you to barf up more rancid bites of pseudoscholarship that some "experts" have prechewed for you, such as "Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples."  For one thing, "most" =/= "all."

Nor is "none" as you asserted.
I haven't asserted a thing, except the facts that "most" =/= "all," and Judaism isn't an offshoot of paganism (a rather amorphous term).

Quote
The Bible says that Abraham came from the heathen? Oh, where does it say that?

Abraham's departure from Ur. We are later told that Abraham's relatives in Ur were worshipping idols(Rachel stealing the idols of he fathers). You can find Abraham's departure from Ur in the Jewish Scriptures, Christian Scriptures and Muslims Scriptures. Make your pick.
I'm from Chicago. Doesn't make me a Democrat.

Rachel and her father grew up in Harran, after Abraham departed from it.

Btw, Abraham's departure from Ur isn't in Muslim Scriptures. That would be enough to make me question your grasp of the material at hand, if it hadn't been evident before.

Quote
Yes, I'm aware of the theory of a Yahweh-Astarte pair, and the meagre evidence twisted into such a narrative.  The Biblical narrative of the Hebrews falling into Canaanite paganism and assimilating the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob into it fits better.

Scholars say that most of the Tanakh was written during the Babylonian captivity to explain the Jewish condition.
And even if true, and?

Quote
The documentary hypothesis is for one thing, plural: its partisans can't agree amongst themselves on it.  Since the Pentateuch/Torah doesn't say that Moses wrote it, there doesn't seem to be much point on arguing it.
Then you got a problem. Because if Moses didn't write it then who did? There is little to no proof of the historicy of Moses or the existence of Israel in Egypt and the Exodus. What basis do you have for the inspiration of the Torah?
Since you haven't identified what problem I'd have, we have no basis to discuss your last question.

As for the existence of Israel, that is securely dated as a people c.1208 BC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele#.22Israel_is_laid_waste.22
As for the Exodus, go find another monument that the Egyptians erected to commemorate their defeat by anyone.  The Egyptian historian Manentho does record an expulsion of foreigners who, according to him, settled in Palestine and founded Jerusalem.

Hmmmm. Who could that be? Roll Eyes

Quote
"Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values." I know that they don't appeal to the smug who think they know better, and don't want anything prove the contrary.  Atheism-the opiate of the dissolute.
Actually the Judeo-Christian-Islamic theology is the one who appeals to smugs and trolls who find justification of criminal, obscure acts in their religion.

Considering that the laws are primitive and cannot be universally bind as ethical and that it had many authors and editor, what makes your "torah" inspired and authoritative? Where it's her authority drawed from?
Care to put some meat on that dry bone?  as opposed to vague accusation? Otherwise, we have no basis of comparison to weigh your "claims."

Quote
Since Judaism dates from the time of Christ, and their Torah warns them of the Canaanite paganism over a thousand years before that, of course paganism (some form of it at least) predates it.
What Torah? Didn't you say that Moses did not write the Torah? According to the Documentary Hypothesis the Torah was compiled and finished mostly around the 6th century BCE. The Caananite religion preceded that, and all pagan religions did. Plus there were many "scrolls of the laws". On the time of King Josiah the High Priest Hilkiah "discovered" a scroll of the law they knew nothing about and that they were transgressing at that moment. As I said no proof of an Israeli migration according to archaeology. So what authority does the Torah hold then? Where does this authority come from? From her editors, redactors, etc? Smiley "How do you say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly he made it falsely; the pen of the scribes made it a lie."(Jer 8:Cool
"Finished mostly around the 6th century BC" (I don't go for the BCE crap).  The material is actually older than that (to go into the evidence of that, perhaps we would have to wean you off the milky Kool Aid first), but we'll go with 6th century BC.  That is still talking about Canaanite paganism half a millenium before the rise of Judaism.

As for the migration, none of the ancients doubted it. Herodotus, for instance, refers to them as Egyptians and the 'Syrians of Palestine', because of their practice of circumcision in the 5th century. Starting around 1200 BC, Palestinian settlements come up in the archaeological record lacking pig bones, something found in abundance earlier and in other settlements.

The archaeological record is nowhere as full and clear as you would like it to be.

You can't handle the facts of earth.  How are you to deal with facts of heaven, and the authority of Scripture?

Quote
Since the New Testament predates the Talmud, how did the former's Christianity "spring forth from" the latter's Judaism?

Since the OT precedes the NT, Christianity is a sect of Judaism, as your bible says "We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect" Acts 24:5
For your point to be valid, the Tanakh would have to precede the OT.

"Jew" in the above verse, btw, is the same for "Judaean," e.g.  "King of the Jews."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #152 on: March 25, 2014, 02:12:50 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Why don't you answer that one. Did they? Smiley
Yes, but citing their authority is a waste of time to someone who denies it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #153 on: March 25, 2014, 02:16:10 PM »

You are conflating nominal with cardinal numerics. John 5:43 Yehoshuwah says he comes in the name of his Father. He did not say he was the same numeric thing as his Father.

The Trinity is heresy. Yehoshuwah was subordinate to the Father, ontologically, not just functionally,

John 14: 28 You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.

John 5: 19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever [e]the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

1 Cor. 11:3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

John 8: 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’;

John 20: 17 Jesus *said to her, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.’”
So you are asserting that John (and by extension, the rest of the NT as in the King James Bible, etc.) record what Jesus actually said?  Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?

Actually? Continuum fallacy. There is enough in the christian bibles to get to the truth.

"Did they so record infallibly by inspiration?"

>>>Yes, in a semitic language and their writings were suppressed to avoid the obvious implication: Hebrew Racial Supremacy. 
Then you have no NT, and hence you do not believe in "all of them."

If you mean that in order for man to have revelation that he has to have the original texts you sir are delusional.
He has to have some text, not some delusions of a text.

There are over 5000 that I study regularly.
Then produce them.

Quote
in which case the Jewish and Samaritan Scriptures have nothing for you, and you can be ignored in your obscurity.
More assertions. I am still waiting for the list of arguments I have made to be answered.

Start here: http://drakeshelton.com/2014/01/27/21-proofs-christians-hate-the-bible/
no, I don't need your spit up milk.  you have to be weaned for some meat.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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: 37,866



« Reply #154 on: March 25, 2014, 02:19:12 PM »

I already did. Your pelagian anthropology states that a hypostasis cannot suffer any degree of compulsion that is necessary for patriarchy. I already had this conversation.

evidently with yourself.  You know, you go blind that way.

It was around post 68
I see, here
What more is there to write? Calvinism was officially condemned by the Eastern Orthodox Church as heretical by the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem in 1672.

By no means am I encouraging you to continue any engagement with Olivianus/Drake, but he's pretty clearly not a Calvinist (anymore) and rejects Christianity altogether.

I am  not a Christian but Calvin's doctrines of grace are based on a patriarchal anthropology which I cannot escape being a bible believer. Your Marxist individualism is the basis for modern communism.

Where is the "marxist individualism" in either Nephi's or Fr John's posts you have quoted? If you're attempting to smear either or both of them, it speaks volumes about how shallow and bereft your ideas are.

You guys are pelagians in your anthropology. You think it is against free will that any human suffer under compulsions either outward or inward. You think for a person's identity to be determined in any measure by someone else to be against free will. That is why you are against patriarchy. Patriarchy requires compulsion.  

What does pelagianism (which Orthodoxy isn't, BTW, pelagianism is a declared heresy) have to do with Marxism?  Huh Huh Huh

No natural compulsions. The person is free to act any way they will. Women can be equal to men. Women need not be confined to traditional roles based on nature because nature means nothing when it comes to action. Blacks are equal to whites and nature plays no part in their activity. Sure blacks can be accepted into Harvard on affirmative action and make straight A's because nature has not dictated how smart the black man is. Sure, he'll pass with flying colors because he has evoked the gnomie to do so. At least that is the philosophy; though we all know it isn't true, we say it is to make us all feel better.
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
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,506



« Reply #155 on: March 25, 2014, 02:43:29 PM »

no, I don't need your spit up milk.  you have to be weaned for some meat.

How are you reading this stuff? It's like he went out of his to make his writing impossible to look at.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

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


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #156 on: March 25, 2014, 03:38:16 PM »

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
hecma925
Non-clairvoyant
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 6,000


Pray for me, a sinner.


WWW
« Reply #157 on: March 25, 2014, 04:00:46 PM »

no, I don't need your spit up milk.  you have to be weaned for some meat.

How are you reading this stuff? It's like he went out of his to make his writing impossible to look at.

I wish he had put up Queen Elizabeth II as a background.  Much more cheery, IMHO.
Logged

Skydive
Warned
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 465



« Reply #158 on: March 25, 2014, 04:05:03 PM »

I haven't asked you to barf up more rancid bites of pseudoscholarship that some "experts" have prechewed for you, such as "Most of Judaism mythology = Middle Eastern mythology that was prelevant among heathen peoples."  For one thing, "most" =/= "all."

Nor is "none" as you asserted.
I haven't asserted a thing, except the facts that "most" =/= "all," and Judaism isn't an offshoot of paganism (a rather amorphous term).

Then where does Judaism come from?
Quote
Quote
The Bible says that Abraham came from the heathen? Oh, where does it say that?

Abraham's departure from Ur. We are later told that Abraham's relatives in Ur were worshipping idols(Rachel stealing the idols of he fathers). You can find Abraham's departure from Ur in the Jewish Scriptures, Christian Scriptures and Muslims Scriptures. Make your pick.
I'm from Chicago. Doesn't make me a Democrat.

Rachel and her father grew up in Harran, after Abraham departed from it.

Btw, Abraham's departure from Ur isn't in Muslim Scriptures. That would be enough to make me question your grasp of the material at hand, if it hadn't been evident before.

It doesn't matter. Paganism precedes any drop of Judaism and/or Christianity. The background where Abraham came from was most likely pagan.
Quote
Quote
Yes, I'm aware of the theory of a Yahweh-Astarte pair, and the meagre evidence twisted into such a narrative.  The Biblical narrative of the Hebrews falling into Canaanite paganism and assimilating the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob into it fits better.

Scholars say that most of the Tanakh was written during the Babylonian captivity to explain the Jewish condition.
And even if true, and?

And it is a lie. It did not happen. What part of that reasoning don't you understand?
Quote
Quote
The documentary hypothesis is for one thing, plural: its partisans can't agree amongst themselves on it.  Since the Pentateuch/Torah doesn't say that Moses wrote it, there doesn't seem to be much point on arguing it.
Then you got a problem. Because if Moses didn't write it then who did? There is little to no proof of the historicy of Moses or the existence of Israel in Egypt and the Exodus. What basis do you have for the inspiration of the Torah?
Since you haven't identified what problem I'd have, we have no basis to discuss your last question.

As for the existence of Israel, that is securely dated as a people c.1208 BC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele#.22Israel_is_laid_waste.22

Dubious inscription to say the least and not a definite proof. No certain proof that that is actually Israel just because 3 letters from 6 match. It is a communality in manhood for cities to have similar prefixes or suffixes or whatever. There is an Arad in Israel and an Arad in Romania and they are diametrically opposed, having nothing to do one with the other.

Quote
As for the Exodus, go find another monument that the Egyptians erected to commemorate their defeat by anyone.  The Egyptian historian Manentho does record an expulsion of foreigners who, according to him, settled in Palestine and founded Jerusalem.

Hmmmm. Who could that be? Roll Eyes


I'll need to see some quotations for that.

Quote
Quote
"Some of the laws in the Torah and the stories in it are totally unappealing to intelligent ethics and values." I know that they don't appeal to the smug who think they know better, and don't want anything prove the contrary.  Atheism-the opiate of the dissolute.
Actually the Judeo-Christian-Islamic theology is the one who appeals to smugs and trolls who find justification of criminal, obscure acts in their religion.

Considering that the laws are primitive and cannot be universally bind as ethical and that it had many authors and editor, what makes your "torah" inspired and authoritative? Where it's her authority drawed from?
Care to put some meat on that dry bone?  as opposed to vague accusation? Otherwise, we have no basis of comparison to weigh your "claims."

Sure.. Animal sacrifice, genocide, infanticide, crimes, slavery, rape, kashrut .. and some verses :

Quote
Don't let cattle graze with other kinds of Cattle (Leviticus 19:19)

Don't have a variety of crops on the same field. (Leviticus 19:19)

Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)

Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)

Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)  Have you ever done that?

If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10).  I wonder if Dr. Laura would like that one to be enforced?

If a man sleeps with his father's wife... both him and his father's wife is to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:11)

If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death.  (Leviticus 20:14)

If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed. (Leviticus 20:15-16).