Author Topic: could this be a mormon plot  (Read 9850 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jewish voice

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 886
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Still dont know yet
could this be a mormon plot
« on: November 15, 2014, 02:55:09 PM »
I seen and been reading about Glenn Beck and his new turn of heart and remaking his tv channel. I must say I really love his ideas of uplifting stories his bring Christ back into Christmas his some what pixar history house. It all sounds great.
I can't help wounder if this isn't all a Mormon plot to convert people to their faith. Kinda like a better byu channel. Do you think my gut feeling is wrong on this

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2014, 03:24:33 PM »
I don't know that much about Beck specifically, but I do think that Mormonism has been waging a PR war for a long time trying to convince American Christians that Mormonism is itself a part of Christianity and that Christians and Mormons worship the same God.  By "American Christians" I mean the rank-and-file of course, not the educated.  If you asked the average American Christian who buys Glenn Beck's books or tunes in to his show if Beck is a "Christian" or stands for "Christian values" many will likely say yes.  What does it matter to a Mormon if we keep "Christ in Christmas" if their Christ not our Christ but rather one of the children of a flesh and bone god - a man born on another planet - who conceived him through natural sex?

And yet the Mormons tell us:

Quote
We are Christians in a very real sense and that is coming to be more and more widely recognized. Once upon a time people everywhere said we are not Christians. They have come to recognize that we are, and that we have a very vital and dynamic religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. We, of course, accept Jesus Christ as our Leader, our King, our Savior...the dominant figure in the history of the world, the only perfect Man who ever walked the earth, the living Son of the living God. He is our Savior and our Redeemer through whose atoning sacrifice has come the opportunity of eternal life. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pray and worship in the name of Jesus Christ. He is the center of our faith and the head of our Church. The Book of Mormon is Another Testament of Jesus Christ and witnesses of His divinity, His life, and His Atonement.

http://www.mormon.org/faq/mormon-christian

So, yes, I've also heard Glenn Beck self-identify as a "Christian".  It doesn't mean he is one though, since the Christian God was not a man born on the planet Kolob.  I think your instincts are on the money.  Mormonism wants to "mainstream" itself, and this is becoming easier in an increasingly shallow and simplistic America in which many people believe that the real battle is between "people of faith" (which would include anything that "looks Christian" to an American, like Mormonism, Adventism or Jehovah's Witnesses - but not Islam or Hinduism!) and atheism.  Again, in our increasingly shallow and stupid society, appearances are more important than substance.  I know quite a few Evangelicals and Pentecostals who are willing to give Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists the benefit of the doubt when it comes to whether or not they're "Christian" - or at least have the discussion - but for whom the Roman Catholics are definitely not Christian.  A squeaky clean, white bread, Ned Flanders image trumps whether or not one worships the actual God of the Old and New Testament or a bizarre and fictional parody of that God.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2014, 03:46:27 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline jewish voice

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 886
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Still dont know yet
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2014, 04:25:51 PM »
I don't know that much about Beck specifically, but I do think that Mormonism has been waging a PR war for a long time trying to convince American Christians that Mormonism is itself a part of Christianity and that Christians and Mormons worship the same God.  By "American Christians" I mean the rank-and-file of course, not the educated.  If you asked the average American Christian who buys Glenn Beck's books or tunes in to his show if Beck is a "Christian" or stands for "Christian values" many will likely say yes.  What does it matter to a Mormon if we keep "Christ in Christmas" if their Christ not our Christ but rather one of the children of a flesh and bone god - a man born on another planet - who conceived him through natural sex?

And yet the Mormons tell us:

Quote
We are Christians in a very real sense and that is coming to be more and more widely recognized. Once upon a time people everywhere said we are not Christians. They have come to recognize that we are, and that we have a very vital and dynamic religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. We, of course, accept Jesus Christ as our Leader, our King, our Savior...the dominant figure in the history of the world, the only perfect Man who ever walked the earth, the living Son of the living God. He is our Savior and our Redeemer through whose atoning sacrifice has come the opportunity of eternal life. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pray and worship in the name of Jesus Christ. He is the center of our faith and the head of our Church. The Book of Mormon is Another Testament of Jesus Christ and witnesses of His divinity, His life, and His Atonement.

http://www.mormon.org/faq/mormon-christian

So, yes, I've also heard Glenn Beck self-identify as a "Christian".  It doesn't mean he is one though, since the Christian God was not a man born on the planet Kolob.  I think your instincts are on the money.  Mormonism wants to "mainstream" itself, and this is becoming easier in an increasingly shallow and simplistic America in which many people believe that the real battle is between "people of faith" (which would include anything that "looks Christian" to an American, like Mormonism, Adventism or Jehovah's Witnesses - but not Islam or Hinduism!) and atheism.  Again, in our increasingly shallow and stupid society, appearances are more important than substance.  I know quite a few Evangelicals and Pentecostals who are willing to give Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists the benefit of the doubt when it comes to whether or not they're "Christian" - or at least have the discussion - but for whom the Roman Catholics are definitely not Christian.  A squeaky clean, white bread, Ned Flanders image trumps whether or not one worships the actual God of the Old and New Testament or a bizarre and fictional parody of that God.
I agree to me I see all these great ideas he has then somewhere along the line be trying to get people join the church of latter day saints. I know nothing about them really other than people say their a cult

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2014, 04:33:04 PM »
If the Mormons want to be accepted by the mainstream media, they need to remember that it's not the 1950s anymore, and there's no surer way to alienate the MSM than to present yourselves as well-groomed arch-WASP Middle Americans. They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity. Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus. If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

Offline xOrthodox4Christx

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,321
  • Faith: Orthodox Catholic Church
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2014, 04:58:56 PM »
Glenn Beck is crazy, whatever he says or does should be questioned.
This profile is defunct as of 11/8/2017. I created it before Orthodoxy, and have used it after Orthodoxy.

I reject all that I wrote that isn't in accordance with the teachings of the Orthodox Church. Also, my posts reflect my opinions (present or former) and nothing else.

I will likely lurk on this forum under a different name.

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,878
  • Excelsior
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2014, 05:04:34 PM »
Recently, he said he has been suffering from a condition for a long time. I am not making fun of that. I hope he does get some type of help, if that's what he wants. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/11/11/Glen-Beck-Announces-Severe-Health-Problems-Talks-of-His-Life-Changing-Pivot-Point

(I apologize for talking about politics outside the politics forum, but I thought it was semi-relevant given the topic.)
« Last Edit: November 15, 2014, 05:05:24 PM by biro »
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2014, 05:14:47 PM »
I know nothing about them really other than people say their a cult

So, examine their beliefs for yourself.  Let me know if they seem Christian to you.

I was trying to keep politics out of my replies and just deal with the issue of how Mormonism is trying to mainstream itself and pass as Christian, but I guess since Glenn Beck was mentioned in the OP I guess it's inevitable that this thread will be cast into politics.

If the Mormons want to be accepted by the mainstream media, they need to remember that it's not the 1950s anymore, and there's no surer way to alienate the MSM than to present yourselves as well-groomed arch-WASP Middle Americans.

That's exactly what most of them are though.

They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity.

You're barking up the wrong tree.  They're not interested in courting the political left, they're interested in courting the political right.  Besides, "weird cults" are something that creep everyone out, regardless of their political orientation.

Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus.

Nah, it's a minus all around.  For those on the right, polygamy flies in the face of the traditional definition of marriage.  For those on the left, it smacks of a male dominated hierarchy and ownership of women.  There's no good way to spin a harem in America.

If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

I doubt it.  People whose ancestors have been through far worse than what the Mormons endured haven't had much luck in getting reparations or even igniting any serious discussion thereof.  Besides, like I said, they're gonna be unpopular all around.  To the Evangelical right, they're a non-Christian cult.  To the left, they're a white male dominated, polygamous freak show who until the late 1970s banned blacks from entering into their "priesthood",  taught that black skin was the result of a curse, and that good black people would become white in heaven, and (as of last year) still discouraged "race-mixing" and even marrying below one's class among their youth.  No, their best bet is doing exactly what they're doing: trying to convince the Evangelical right that they're Christian too.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2014, 05:29:12 PM »
I know nothing about them really other than people say their a cult

So, examine their beliefs for yourself.  Let me know if they seem Christian to you.

I was trying to keep politics out of my replies and just deal with the issue of how Mormonism is trying to mainstream itself and pass as Christian, but I guess since Glenn Beck was mentioned in the OP I guess it's inevitable that this thread will be cast into politics.

If the Mormons want to be accepted by the mainstream media, they need to remember that it's not the 1950s anymore, and there's no surer way to alienate the MSM than to present yourselves as well-groomed arch-WASP Middle Americans.

That's exactly what most of them are though.

They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity.

You're barking up the wrong tree.  They're not interested in courting the political left, they're interested in courting the political right.  Besides, "weird cults" are something that creep everyone out, regardless of their political orientation.

Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus.

Nah, it's a minus all around.  For those on the right, polygamy flies in the face of the traditional definition of marriage.  For those on the left, it smacks of a male dominated hierarchy and ownership of women.  There's no good way to spin a harem in America.

If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

I doubt it.  People whose ancestors have been through far worse than what the Mormons endured haven't had much luck in getting reparations or even igniting any serious discussion thereof.  Besides, like I said, they're gonna be unpopular all around.  To the Evangelical right, they're a non-Christian cult.  To the left, they're a white male dominated, polygamous freak show who until the late 1970s banned blacks from entering into their "priesthood",  taught that black skin was the result of a curse, and that good black people would become white in heaven, and (as of last year) still discouraged "race-mixing" and even marrying below one's class among their youth.  No, their best bet is doing exactly what they're doing: trying to convince the Evangelical right that they're Christian too.

Identity is as much about how you present yourself as the genes you're born with. As you note, the Mormons have ended up courting the right and presenting themselves as respectable Republicans, so the Left and most respectable media outlets hate them, even though they have many characteristics that could easily qualify them for sacred victimhood status and all the associated government perks, if their leaders decided that this was the better way to promote themselves.

As for "weird cult", that indeed is what I consider them, but then I consider the Muslims a weird cult, too, yet the Left has determined that Muslims are a protected minority and that the chief danger is "Islamophobia" rather than Islam. Never mind their retrograde misogyny and homophobia; that's not what counts in the victimhood sweepstakes. It's not about ideological consistency but playing the media game right so that you're the "who" in the "who/whom".

But I think you're probably right. It would take a huge effort to change their Straight White Male image in order to please the Left and they probably reckon the Right still has enough political oomph not to make the shift worth that effort.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2014, 06:13:19 PM »
Identity is as much about how you present yourself as the genes you're born with.

True, but re-branding an entire religion without compromising its actual beliefs would be a difficult proposition at best.  Unrealistic if you ask me.  Mormonism (like Islam) is a conservative beast by nature, just conservative in a different way than Evangelical Christianity.

As you note, the Mormons have ended up courting the right and presenting themselves as respectable Republicans, so the Left and most respectable media outlets hate them, even though they have many characteristics that could easily qualify them for sacred victimhood status and all the associated government perks, if their leaders decided that this was the better way to promote themselves.

I don't think this is the case.  I don't think that the mainstream media is any more hostile to Mormonism than it is to other religions.  The media seems to me to be anti-religion in general, whether those religions have aligned themselves with the political right or not.  I've noticed that a cleric of any stripe involved in a scandal - whether he's a liberal Lutheran or a conservative Baptist - gets nailed to the wall a lot faster than a secular CEO accused of the same crime, and stays in regular rotation a lot longer too.  I don't think that it would be realistic for the Mormons to aspire to "sacred victimhood" status either, as most people wouldn't buy it from a group of rich white guys who discourage their kids from dating outside of their "race" and economic class.

As for "weird cult", that indeed is what I consider them, but then I consider the Muslims a weird cult, too, yet the Left has determined that Muslims are a protected minority and that the chief danger is "Islamophobia" rather than Islam. Never mind their retrograde misogyny and homophobia; that's not what counts in the victimhood sweepstakes. It's not about ideological consistency but playing the media game right so that you're the "who" in the "who/whom".

I'm definitely with you as far as the barbarism of Islam is concerned, but it does seem to me that the mainstream media is increasingly critical of them as well, using their extremism to tar everyone with the general "religion is bad" brush.

But I think you're probably right. It would take a huge effort to change their Straight White Male image in order to please the Left and they probably reckon the Right still has enough political oomph not to make the shift worth that effort.

This assumes that they are disingenuous enough to do so, which might be true, since they only had a "divine revelation" about admitting blacks to their "priesthood" after the political winds shifted in the USA after the Civil Rights Movement.  Giving them the benefit of the doubt, however, it could be that what you describe above is just a part of who they are, and that they would be unwilling to sacrifice that character to please the left, even if the right loses its oomph.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2014, 06:34:43 PM »
There are some media figures who are consistent in their contempt for all religion, including Islam, e.g. Bill Maher. I think they're wrong, but I always respect consistency and having the courage of one's convictions. But I still say that liberals and the left are mostly characterized by an opportunism that approves of any religion that defines itself in opposition to the core culture, i.e. straight white Christians, while demonizing any religion that identifies itself with that core culture. The Islamophobia of the New Atheists is the exception rather than the rule.

Scott Alexander over at slatestarcodex.com had an interesting post where he mentions that his left-wing friends got really mad at him when he expressed happiness at bin Laden's death, but then a year later the same people were all whooping with joy at Thatcher's demise. Alexander is pretty left-wing himself, but he has an admirable degree of self-awareness.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2014, 06:45:15 PM »
I don't concern myself nearly as much as you do with American politics, and truthfully, I don't know who or what half of these websites and pundits you mention are.  [In another thread, you attempted a burn on me saying something along the lines of "This isn't salon.com.  We don't appreciate that here".  (Or some such.  I'm paraphrasing.)  I had to google the site to see what you were referring to.]  You may be exposed to more radical elements of the media on the left or right than I am by virtue of your interest in this sort of thing, but in my admittedly limited experience (relatively speaking), I'm not seeing what you're seeing.  As I said though, I'm not a big politico like you are.  I don't need the agita.  You could also be viewing things through an entirely different lens than I do based on what I take to be our radically disparate backgrounds.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2014, 06:49:13 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2014, 07:04:29 PM »
I don't concern myself nearly as much as you do with American politics, and truthfully, I don't know who or what half of these websites and pundits you mention are.  [In another thread, you attempted a burn on me saying something along the lines of "This isn't salon.com.  We don't appreciate that here".  (Or some such.  I'm paraphrasing.)  I had to google the site to see what you were referring to.]  You may be exposed to more radical elements of the media on the left or right than I am by virtue of your interest in this sort of thing, but in my admittedly limited experience (relatively speaking), I'm not seeing what you're seeing.  As I said though, I'm not a big politico like you are.  I don't need the agita.  You could also be viewing things through an entirely different lens than I do based on what I take to be our radically disparate backgrounds.

OK that's cool (though I do remember you pointing me to articles about racism in Salon, though it might have been Slate; I confuse the two occasionally). I suppose when it comes to Mormonism, it seems extremely fashionable to hate them, and I'm a contrarian by nature so that kind of fashionable hate tends to raise questions in my head as to whether they're really all that bad. I probably would hate them too if I lived in Utah, but having lived in a pretty left-wing university environment for a long time I don't see them as the main enemy. As it stands, they seem to have some wacky beliefs that make traditional Christianity look downright rationalist, but I have enough exposure to left-wing types to understand that we're all equally nuts to most liberals. And speaking as an anti-ecumenist, if they're theologically deluded, I would have to say the same about more conventional Christian denominations like Protestants and Catholics.

What's interesting in that even today there are plenty of otherwise syncretistic, Moral Majority-type evangelicals who want nothing to do with Mormons, just as there are many who still see Catholics as beyond the pale. This is despite the fact that, politically, all these groups see eye-to-eye on so many issues and you'd think would make common cause.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2014, 07:06:03 PM by Jonathan Gress »

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2014, 07:48:41 PM »
OK that's cool (though I do remember you pointing me to articles about racism in Salon, though it might have been Slate; I confuse the two occasionally).

If I did link to an article on one of those sites during one of our discussions (which is possible) it's not because I frequent them, but rather, during one of our chats about racism, I wanted to speak about something that stuck with me from my experiences during the pre-internet age (such as the murders of James Byrd or Yusef Hawkins) and had to search around for an online source to substantiate what I already knew (since I can't link to the period print material in my library).  I'm glad to know that's why you threw the reference at me though, and glad that I had a chance to clarify my stance.  I'm not really an apologist for the right or the left, but rather have my own moral compass (based on the Church's teachings) which aligns with the one on some issues and the other on others.

I suppose when it comes to Mormonism, it seems extremely fashionable to hate them, and I'm a contrarian by nature so that kind of fashionable hate tends to raise questions in my head as to whether they're really all that bad. I probably would hate them too if I lived in Utah, but having lived in a pretty left-wing university environment for a long time I don't see them as the main enemy.

That's understandable.  I don't hate them, for the record.  I simply don't appreciate their attempts to muddy the waters and pass themselves off as Christians.  I'm also none to pleased with the fact that most "religious" Americans adhere to so superficial a faith that so long as the name of Jesus is mentioned they're willing to accept any group as "Christian" (except, ironically traditional, liturgical churches) without question.

As it stands, they seem to have some wacky beliefs that make traditional Christianity look downright rationalist, but I have enough exposure to left-wing types to understand that we're all equally nuts to most liberals. And speaking as an anti-ecumenist, if they're theologically deluded, I would have to say the same about more conventional Christian denominations like Protestants and Catholics.

You and I are of one accord here.

What's interesting in that even today there are plenty of otherwise syncretistic, Moral Majority-type evangelicals who want nothing to do with Mormons, just as there are many who still see Catholics as beyond the pale. This is despite the fact that, politically, all these groups see eye-to-eye on so many issues and you'd think would make common cause.

I have to give these credit for at least placing their theological convictions ahead of political expediency.  I've read articles by some of these Evangelicals you're referencing, and for them the idea of having their children come to regard Mormons as "fellow Christians" is a more frightening proposition than anything the atheistic left can dish out.  I would tend to agree.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2014, 01:50:56 AM »
I really disliked their advertising.  "I'm a Mormon."

My response:  "So?"
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline orthonorm

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,715
  • Ad Aluminum!
  • Faith: DSM 5
  • Jurisdiction: Apostle to the Church of ASD
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2014, 02:20:56 AM »
If the Mormons want to be accepted by the mainstream media, they need to remember that it's not the 1950s anymore, and there's no surer way to alienate the MSM than to present yourselves as well-groomed arch-WASP Middle Americans. They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity. Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus. If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

Spoken as someone who seems to know about weird cults and their attraction from experience.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2014, 08:45:09 AM »
If the Mormons want to be accepted by the mainstream media, they need to remember that it's not the 1950s anymore, and there's no surer way to alienate the MSM than to present yourselves as well-groomed arch-WASP Middle Americans. They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity. Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus. If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

Spoken as someone who seems to know about weird cults and their attraction from experience.

I admit it's true. I did have a New Atheist phase.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #16 on: November 16, 2014, 12:17:26 PM »
I really disliked their advertising.  "I'm a Mormon."

My response:  "So?"

Considering that the number one obstacle to Orthodoxy in the USA is people not knowing it exists (or thinking it exists solely to hold Greekfests, etc.), perhaps having Orthodox ads on national TV wouldn't be such a bad idea?

I agree though that the Mormon ads are not a good example to follow. Perhaps an Orthodox ad could just show a beautiful scene from a cathedral with people chanting, or perhaps it could show an interesting anecdote from the life of a saint, followed by the words "Come and See" and a link to a website where you can find the nearest parish?

Ancient Faith Radio might be interested in doing something like that.
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline jewish voice

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 886
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Still dont know yet
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #17 on: November 16, 2014, 04:04:30 PM »
I really disliked their advertising.  "I'm a Mormon."

My response:  "So?"

Considering that the number one obstacle to Orthodoxy in the USA is people not knowing it exists (or thinking it exists solely to hold Greekfests, etc.), perhaps having Orthodox ads on national TV wouldn't be such a bad idea?

I agree though that the Mormon ads are not a good example to follow. Perhaps an Orthodox ad could just show a beautiful scene from a cathedral with people chanting, or perhaps it could show an interesting anecdote from the life of a saint, followed by the words "Come and See" and a link to a website where you can find the nearest parish?

Ancient Faith Radio might be interested in doing something like that.
your such an extremist you better watch those ideas of yours  ;) this is twice you done this now. 3rd time we just beat the protestant out of ya  :laugh:
« Last Edit: November 16, 2014, 04:08:37 PM by jewish voice »

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #18 on: November 16, 2014, 05:30:33 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #19 on: November 16, 2014, 05:35:39 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

What's WASR?

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2014, 05:51:28 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

What's WASR?

I don't know what they R stands for, but I take his point that they're not Protestant.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #21 on: November 16, 2014, 08:40:13 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

What's WASR?

I don't know what they R stands for, but I take his point that they're not Protestant.

I'd hazard a guess that R stands for Restorationist.

The term Restorationist can be used to mean one of several loosely related movements originating in the United States during the 1800s. One is the Latter-Day Saint movement, of which Mormonism forms the largest branch (there are other branches that include Community of Christ, Bickertonites, etc.) Another is the Stone-Campbell movement, which gave rise to denominations like the Church of Christ and the Disciples of Christ. Adventism is sometimes classified under this umbrella as well.

These movements sought to "restore" the early church which they believed had fallen into heresy. Where they differed was how they thought this needed to be done. The LDS believed there needed to be prophets receiving continuing revelation from God. The Stone-Campbellites resorted to an extremely strict "nuda scriptura" approach, "reading the Scriptures as though no one had read in the wake of William Miller's failed doomsday prediction; they ended up coalescing around a single new self-proclaimed prophetess, Ellen White, who claimed that the prediction had been correct but only in a "spiritual" sense. They believe White had the unique ability to interpret Scripture and her own writings were equally inspired.

I've seen articles describing the Mormon ethos as rooted in Romanticism, because it stresses emotions and spiritual experiences over all else. In contrast, Campbellism is very rationalistic in keeping with Enlightenment ideals. Not sure where Adventism falls on this spectrum.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2014, 08:40:36 PM by Minnesotan »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #22 on: November 16, 2014, 08:40:27 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

Maybe WASR could be pronounced like Wazir? That'd make it sound too foreign, though.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2014, 08:41:42 PM by Minnesotan »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline qawe

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 581
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #23 on: November 16, 2014, 11:02:16 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

What's WASR?

I don't know what they R stands for, but I take his point that they're not Protestant.

Republican?
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, the sinner.

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,913
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #24 on: November 17, 2014, 04:52:14 AM »
But I still say that liberals and the left are mostly characterized by an opportunism that approves of any religion that defines itself in opposition to the core culture, i.e. straight white Christians,

What about Ethiopia and the Middle East which were Christian before most white people ever were? I hate when religion becomes degraded into mere culture.

Quote
The Islamophobia of the New Atheists is the exception rather than the rule.

Bigotry is only acceptable when it's minority-on-minority I suppose. Although to be fair, I've discovered that most atheists are still stigmatized by both the Right and the Left alike--the former because they see them as godless criminals and the latter because they see them as intolerant bigots.

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,913
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2014, 04:57:07 AM »
They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity.

They don't need to play it up since they are a persecuted minority (or at least were). Have you studied just how badly the United States treated the Mormons? I'm not saying they're not crazy far-rightist bigots, but Uncle Sam certainly wasn't very kind to them.

Quote
Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus. If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

Apart from the Mormon Awareness Month (those things are incredibly corny and stupid) that other stuff seems fair. It's restitution for what Uncle Sam did to them. However, Mormons seem to have done pretty well on their own as they've become a very wealthy and successful minority.

They're the Jews of America. That's why everyone hates them.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 04:57:37 AM by JamesR »

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,913
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #26 on: November 17, 2014, 05:14:34 AM »
they're gonna be unpopular all around.  To the Evangelical right, they're a non-Christian cult.  To the left, they're a white male dominated, polygamous freak show who until the late 1970s banned blacks from entering into their "priesthood",  taught that black skin was the result of a curse, and that good black people would become white in heaven, and (as of last year) still discouraged "race-mixing" and even marrying below one's class among their youth.

This.

The treatment of minority groups in America is a very interesting thing that evidently seems much more rooted in political gain than by genuine compassion given the inconsistency. Mormons are one of those strange groups. The Right hates them because as Protestants they're just one step weirder than Evangelicals, and the Left because they still too closely resemble Christianity and therefore conservatism. The former says they're not Christian enough and the latter says they're too Christian. Mormons don't have any natural political allies just yet. They're one of those weird groups like the Jews who nobody knows how to deal with. They have to fend for themselves and to a degree they've done surprisingly well at that--which makes people even more xenophobic and hateful toward them than before.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #27 on: November 17, 2014, 09:25:04 AM »
I seen and been reading about Glenn Beck and his new turn of heart and remaking his tv channel. I must say I really love his ideas of uplifting stories his bring Christ back into Christmas his some what pixar history house. It all sounds great.
I can't help wounder if this isn't all a Mormon plot to convert people to their faith. Kinda like a better byu channel. Do you think my gut feeling is wrong on this

Whaaat?
Imagine pushing virtue into the public forum! Bringing folks back to what we initially are, religious!
Creating stories that uphold, uplift, inspire!
Yes, it is ALL those Christians trying spread that joy of a virtuous life with a knowledge of that 'God is Love' notion.
That's why they kill us.
So you want to start with the Mormons?
Get outta town.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2014, 09:44:34 AM »
Below are some of the things that really get my passions in an uproar regarding Orthodoxy: judgment.
If folks wish to trade the truth for a lie, talk TO them, not about them, and rather talk/post, live the life that models what He asks us which is not just talk.
To many of my fellow Orthodox speak poorly of others in their religious life and that bothers me greatly.
We  do not denigrate those that are invalids; I would rather hear about the good that Orthodox brings to us, as oppose to studying others to find their faults.
Lord, forgive my foolish pride, but enough of this idle chatter.
=

I don't know that much about Beck specifically, but I do think that Mormonism has been waging a PR war for a long time trying to convince American Christians that Mormonism is itself a part of Christianity and that Christians and Mormons worship the same God.  By "American Christians" I mean the rank-and-file of course, not the educated.  If you asked the average American Christian who buys Glenn Beck's books or tunes in to his show if Beck is a "Christian" or stands for "Christian values" many will likely say yes.  What does it matter to a Mormon if we keep "Christ in Christmas" if their Christ not our Christ but rather one of the children of a flesh and bone god - a man born on another planet - who conceived him through natural sex?
And yet the Mormons tell us:
Quote
We are Christians in a very real sense and that is coming to be more and more widely recognized. Once upon a time people everywhere said we are not Christians. They have come to recognize that we are, and that we have a very vital and dynamic religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. We, of course, accept Jesus Christ as our Leader, our King, our Savior...the dominant figure in the history of the world, the only perfect Man who ever walked the earth, the living Son of the living God. He is our Savior and our Redeemer through whose atoning sacrifice has come the opportunity of eternal life. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pray and worship in the name of Jesus Christ. He is the center of our faith and the head of our Church. The Book of Mormon is Another Testament of Jesus Christ and witnesses of His divinity, His life, and His Atonement.

http://www.mormon.org/faq/mormon-christian

So, yes, I've also heard Glenn Beck self-identify as a "Christian".  It doesn't mean he is one though, since the Christian God was not a man born on the planet Kolob.  I think your instincts are on the money.  Mormonism wants to "mainstream" itself, and this is becoming easier in an increasingly shallow and simplistic America in which many people believe that the real battle is between "people of faith" (which would include anything that "looks Christian" to an American, like Mormonism, Adventism or Jehovah's Witnesses - but not Islam or Hinduism!) and atheism.  Again, in our increasingly shallow and stupid society, appearances are more important than substance.  I know quite a few Evangelicals and Pentecostals who are willing to give Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists the benefit of the doubt when it comes to whether or not they're "Christian" - or at least have the discussion - but for whom the Roman Catholics are definitely not Christian.  A squeaky clean, white bread, Ned Flanders image trumps whether or not one worships the actual God of the Old and New Testament or a bizarre and fictional parody of that God.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #29 on: November 17, 2014, 10:36:11 AM »
Below are some of the things that really get my passions in an uproar regarding Orthodoxy: judgment.

Well, perhaps you should work on quelling those passions.  Frankly, the faux-indignation routine you're expressing here is as irksome to me as the perceived "judgment" you're reading into my post is to you.  It's not fair to equate those who make distinctions between teachings and doctrines with those who presume to judge people's souls.  I've re-read my post as you've cited it below.  It definitely falls into the former category.  Nowhere did I say that Mormons were bad people or that they were going to hell.  What I said is simply that they are not Christians and that their god is not God.

Is it "judgment" to state that the god of Mormonism is not our God?  Let's examine his characteristics:

+He was born a man of flesh and blood on the planet Kolob.
+He conceives his children (plural) through natural sex with a number of wives.
+He is one of a number of gods, each of whom rules his own planet.

Stating that this is not our God and that those who worship this false deity aren't Christians isn't "judgment" in the sense that you're implying.  It's simply saying that this sort of imaginary deity isn't the Deity.  Neither is Odin or Shiva, but I don't presume to judge the souls of those who worship them.

If folks wish to trade the truth for a lie, talk TO them, not about them,

This is a discussion board.  Someone asked a question about Mormons and we discussed their theology and attempts at mainstreaming in relation to the OP.

Analyzing the Mormon belief system is not "talking about" individual believers in the sense your words imply.  Further, non-Orthodox have always been welcome to discuss and debate theology to their heart's content on these boards.  Further still, discussing theology on these boards doesn't preclude the possibility of "talking to" people of other faiths on these boards or in real life.

and rather talk/post, live the life that models what He asks us which is not just talk.

Don't presume to know what kind of lives we live based on what you're reading into our posts here.


To many of my fellow Orthodox speak poorly of others in their religious life and that bothers me greatly.

Who here has spoken poorly of the spiritual lives of others?  Who pretends to know their piety, their prayer life, or what they do behind closed doors? Does this mean, however, that we can't examine their doctrine?  Does it mean that we should shun comparative theology as a form of "judgment"?

We  do not denigrate those that are invalids; I would rather hear about the good that Orthodox brings to us, as oppose to studying others to find their faults.

Finding faults in theological traditions does not equate to finding fault with individuals or presuming to judge the state of their souls.

Lord, forgive my foolish pride, but enough of this idle chatter.

Indeed.  Amen.

Did you follow your own advice here, Len?  You had a problem with my post, so did you heed your own words and "talk TO me not ABOUT me"?  Or did you decline to address me lovingly and directly, preferring instead to simply hold my post up before the world as an example of what not to do, an example of what enkindles your wrath and makes your blood boil? Did you heed your own call to refrain from engaging in such discussions at all opting instead to live an exemplary life and call me to repentance through your shining example? Or did you decide to launch into a diatribe and make a failed attempt at upbraiding me?
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2014, 10:39:42 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2014, 11:52:06 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

There is no doubt that God has blessed countries and peoples here and there throughout history, even the US.  But Glenn Beck is only repeating a commonly-held American Evangelical political belief that the country exists by divine right.

Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2014, 12:01:26 PM »
But I still say that liberals and the left are mostly characterized by an opportunism that approves of any religion that defines itself in opposition to the core culture, i.e. straight white Christians,

What about Ethiopia and the Middle East which were Christian before most white people ever were? I hate when religion becomes degraded into mere culture.

Quote
The Islamophobia of the New Atheists is the exception rather than the rule.

Bigotry is only acceptable when it's minority-on-minority I suppose. Although to be fair, I've discovered that most atheists are still stigmatized by both the Right and the Left alike--the former because they see them as godless criminals and the latter because they see them as intolerant bigots.

You have a very valid point about religion and culture or ethnicity, at least when we're talking about Christianity, which should be universal. I'm referring particularly to Western political contexts, where being "Christian" is associated strongly with the native, or what I call "core" culture and ethnicity. Leftists who despise traditional Christian culture in these countries will understandably be much more tolerant of religions and cultures that aren't so associated, even if they use anti-religious arguments to attack Christianity. It shows they are motivated less by a principled opposition to religion that by a more visceral hatred for their own traditions. It's simply opportunism, the mirror image of when evangelical voters support a Mormon or Catholic candidate because they agree on moral issues.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 12:02:18 PM by Jonathan Gress »

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #33 on: November 17, 2014, 12:06:18 PM »
They can use their weird cult status in their favor nowadays and play up their persecuted minority identity.

They don't need to play it up since they are a persecuted minority (or at least were). Have you studied just how badly the United States treated the Mormons? I'm not saying they're not crazy far-rightist bigots, but Uncle Sam certainly wasn't very kind to them.

Quote
Having strange non-traditional customs like polygamy is a plus. If they play their cards right, we'll soon be seeing the celebration of Mormon Awareness Month, affirmative action programs to correct the under-representation of Mormons in various professions and possibly even frank talk of federally-funded reparations for forcing them into exile back in the 19th century.

Apart from the Mormon Awareness Month (those things are incredibly corny and stupid) that other stuff seems fair. It's restitution for what Uncle Sam did to them. However, Mormons seem to have done pretty well on their own as they've become a very wealthy and successful minority.

They're the Jews of America. That's why everyone hates them.

If the Mormons are the Jews of America, does that make the Jews the Mormons of America?

But seriously, I think you have a point. The Jews have been a bit better at continuing to portray themselves as sacred victims, hence reluctance of American media to criticize Israel etc. But it's true that they and the Mormons have been very successful and taken full advantage of their freedom to get ahead. They haven't needed affirmative action programs to acquire high status that was previously denied to them. Less successful people are naturally jealous of their success. The high status of the Chinese communities in Southeast Asia is similarly resented, and there they suffer from lots of official discrimination even today.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 12:07:48 PM by Jonathan Gress »

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #34 on: November 17, 2014, 12:18:00 PM »
they're gonna be unpopular all around.  To the Evangelical right, they're a non-Christian cult.  To the left, they're a white male dominated, polygamous freak show who until the late 1970s banned blacks from entering into their "priesthood",  taught that black skin was the result of a curse, and that good black people would become white in heaven, and (as of last year) still discouraged "race-mixing" and even marrying below one's class among their youth.

This.

The treatment of minority groups in America is a very interesting thing that evidently seems much more rooted in political gain than by genuine compassion given the inconsistency. Mormons are one of those strange groups. The Right hates them because as Protestants they're just one step weirder than Evangelicals, and the Left because they still too closely resemble Christianity and therefore conservatism. The former says they're not Christian enough and the latter says they're too Christian. Mormons don't have any natural political allies just yet. They're one of those weird groups like the Jews who nobody knows how to deal with. They have to fend for themselves and to a degree they've done surprisingly well at that--which makes people even more xenophobic and hateful toward them than before.

What's funny is everyone still chooses to hate them for being racist and polygamous even though they specifically renounced these teachings! I think what's really going on is the Left hates them for the same reasons they hate evangelicals and conservative people generally: the way they try so hard to present their 50s, Norman Rockwell image to the rest of the country. Everything the Left despises about America the Mormons gleefully embrace.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #35 on: November 17, 2014, 12:20:49 PM »
Quote
What's funny is everyone still chooses to hate them for being racist and polygamous even though they specifically renounced these teachings!
They didn't renounce them as some reformation of their faith, they renounced it so Utah could become part of the Union. This is no more evident than the recent news concerning Mr. Smith.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #36 on: November 17, 2014, 12:21:43 PM »
Also, what with the recognition of "polyamory" as another sexual orientation, what exactly is so bad about polygamy? It's not about the "what" I think; it's about the "who". Polygamy is bad when Republican-voting Mormons do it; it's fine when Democrat-voting hipsters do it.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 12:22:48 PM by Jonathan Gress »

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #37 on: November 17, 2014, 12:22:24 PM »
Quote
What's funny is everyone still chooses to hate them for being racist and polygamous even though they specifically renounced these teachings!
They didn't renounce them as some reformation of their faith, they renounced it so Utah could become part of the Union. This is no more evident than the recent news concerning Mr. Smith.

PP

Who is Mr Smith? And sorry, they did renounce it, which is why Mormon polygamists have had to form their own church.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #38 on: November 17, 2014, 01:53:42 PM »
Quote
Who is Mr Smith?
Joseph SMith. The founder of Mormonism. The Mormons pushed this idea that he was a monogamist who deeply loved his wife. however last week people uncovered that he had over 40 wives and consumated with most of them. The Mormons have come out and stated that these findings are correct.

Quote
And sorry, they did renounce it
So Utah could become a state. This really isnt hard to find. Its right on the Utah wikipedia page. Its no big secret.

Quote
which is why Mormon polygamists have had to form their own church
So? It doesnt change the fact that the Mormons renounced polygamy for political, not spiritual reasons. Which is why the LDS are "reconsidering" their stance on polygamy...especially after recent polygamist victories in court.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #39 on: November 17, 2014, 01:57:22 PM »
Quote
Who is Mr Smith?
Joseph SMith. The founder of Mormonism. The Mormons pushed this idea that he was a monogamist who deeply loved his wife. however last week people uncovered that he had over 40 wives and consumated with most of them. The Mormons have come out and stated that these findings are correct.

Quote
And sorry, they did renounce it
So Utah could become a state. This really isnt hard to find. Its right on the Utah wikipedia page. Its no big secret.

Quote
which is why Mormon polygamists have had to form their own church
So? It doesnt change the fact that the Mormons renounced polygamy for political, not spiritual reasons. Which is why the LDS are "reconsidering" their stance on polygamy...especially after recent polygamist victories in court.

PP

Ah right Joseph Smith; I thought maybe you were talking about someone more recent.

Look, of course Mormonism is made up. But it seems disingenuous for the Left to attack for them for teachings that they have formally renounced. It's as if they can't find anything about contemporary Mormonism to fix on, so they need to dig up these old defunct teachings.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #40 on: November 17, 2014, 02:00:44 PM »
Quote
Ah right Joseph Smith; I thought maybe you were talking about someone more recent.
Sorry, I try to be kind when referring to him. So I figure Mr. Smith is about as polite as I can get lol

Quote
But it seems disingenuous for the Left to attack for them for teachings that they have formally renounced.
Please dont misunderstand. I dont attack Mormonism on polygamy. There's PLENTY of ammunition against them without having to make stuff up. However, Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Mormons can't brag about repudiating the polygamist teaching as if they had some spiritual awakening, or reformation. They didn't. It was solely for personal gain.....I personally believe that the moment this gay marriage thing is settled in the US, you'll start seeing Mormonism going back to its roots.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #41 on: November 17, 2014, 02:03:41 PM »
Quote
Ah right Joseph Smith; I thought maybe you were talking about someone more recent.
Sorry, I try to be kind when referring to him. So I figure Mr. Smith is about as polite as I can get lol

Quote
But it seems disingenuous for the Left to attack for them for teachings that they have formally renounced.
Please dont misunderstand. I dont attack Mormonism on polygamy. There's PLENTY of ammunition against them without having to make stuff up. However, Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Mormons can't brag about repudiating the polygamist teaching as if they had some spiritual awakening, or reformation. They didn't. It was solely for personal gain.....I personally believe that the moment this gay marriage thing is settled in the US, you'll start seeing Mormonism going back to its roots.

PP

How would gay marriage cause Mormonism to revive polygamy?

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #42 on: November 17, 2014, 02:10:49 PM »
Quote
Ah right Joseph Smith; I thought maybe you were talking about someone more recent.
Sorry, I try to be kind when referring to him. So I figure Mr. Smith is about as polite as I can get lol

Quote
But it seems disingenuous for the Left to attack for them for teachings that they have formally renounced.
Please dont misunderstand. I dont attack Mormonism on polygamy. There's PLENTY of ammunition against them without having to make stuff up. However, Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Mormons can't brag about repudiating the polygamist teaching as if they had some spiritual awakening, or reformation. They didn't. It was solely for personal gain.....I personally believe that the moment this gay marriage thing is settled in the US, you'll start seeing Mormonism going back to its roots.

PP

How would gay marriage cause Mormonism to revive polygamy?
Just my opinion. However, I believe that once its set that states can not legislate marriage laws, they will appeal to the federal government. Using the gay marriage rulings as legal precedent.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #43 on: November 17, 2014, 02:19:03 PM »
Quote
Ah right Joseph Smith; I thought maybe you were talking about someone more recent.
Sorry, I try to be kind when referring to him. So I figure Mr. Smith is about as polite as I can get lol

Quote
But it seems disingenuous for the Left to attack for them for teachings that they have formally renounced.
Please dont misunderstand. I dont attack Mormonism on polygamy. There's PLENTY of ammunition against them without having to make stuff up. However, Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Mormons can't brag about repudiating the polygamist teaching as if they had some spiritual awakening, or reformation. They didn't. It was solely for personal gain.....I personally believe that the moment this gay marriage thing is settled in the US, you'll start seeing Mormonism going back to its roots.

PP

How would gay marriage cause Mormonism to revive polygamy?
Just my opinion. However, I believe that once its set that states can not legislate marriage laws, they will appeal to the federal government. Using the gay marriage rulings as legal precedent.

PP

I see. Well what with the polyamory movement I can see it happening. Given human nature this will in practice legalize polygyny for lots of high-status alpha males but it will be dressed up as a campaign for equality. Of course, I don't think this will stop leftists from continuing to dump on Mormons, but hypocrisy has always been one of their traits.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #44 on: November 17, 2014, 02:31:12 PM »
Quote
Ah right Joseph Smith; I thought maybe you were talking about someone more recent.
Sorry, I try to be kind when referring to him. So I figure Mr. Smith is about as polite as I can get lol

Quote
But it seems disingenuous for the Left to attack for them for teachings that they have formally renounced.
Please dont misunderstand. I dont attack Mormonism on polygamy. There's PLENTY of ammunition against them without having to make stuff up. However, Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Mormons can't brag about repudiating the polygamist teaching as if they had some spiritual awakening, or reformation. They didn't. It was solely for personal gain.....I personally believe that the moment this gay marriage thing is settled in the US, you'll start seeing Mormonism going back to its roots.

PP

How would gay marriage cause Mormonism to revive polygamy?
Just my opinion. However, I believe that once its set that states can not legislate marriage laws, they will appeal to the federal government. Using the gay marriage rulings as legal precedent.

PP

I see. Well what with the polyamory movement I can see it happening. Given human nature this will in practice legalize polygyny for lots of high-status alpha males but it will be dressed up as a campaign for equality. Of course, I don't think this will stop leftists from continuing to dump on Mormons, but hypocrisy has always been one of their traits.
Well, I wont dance into politics on this thread, but there have been some court cases in Utah that have been victories for polygamy that also make me think that it will return to Mormonism. Of which, to be completely honest, I could not give one whit  :laugh:

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline JamesR

  • The Second Coming of Jason
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,913
  • Remember me?
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #45 on: November 17, 2014, 03:00:04 PM »
Also, what with the recognition of "polyamory" as another sexual orientation, what exactly is so bad about polygamy? It's not about the "what" I think; it's about the "who". Polygamy is bad when Republican-voting Mormons do it; it's fine when Democrat-voting hipsters do it.

The way I see it is both are just as bad and detrimental to society. Both should be illegal. But some leftists are only willing to condemn the sexual immorality of men while giving a free pass to women--similar to how Evangelicals used to do the opposite and pressure girls into staying virgins while allowing their sons to fornicate like crazy.

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #46 on: November 17, 2014, 03:03:51 PM »
Below are some of the things that really get my passions in an uproar regarding Orthodoxy: judgment.

Well, perhaps you should work on quelling those passions.  Frankly, the faux-indignation routine you're expressing here is as irksome to me as the perceived "judgment" you're reading into my post is to you.  It's not fair to equate those who make distinctions between teachings and doctrines with those who presume to judge people's souls.  I've re-read my post as you've cited it below.  It definitely falls into the former category.  Nowhere did I say that Mormons were bad people or that they were going to hell.  What I said is simply that they are not Christians and that their god is not God.

Is it "judgment" to state that the god of Mormonism is not our God?  Let's examine his characteristics:

+He was born a man of flesh and blood on the planet Kolob.
+He conceives his children (plural) through natural sex with a number of wives.
+He is one of a number of gods, each of whom rules his own planet.

Stating that this is not our God and that those who worship this false deity aren't Christians isn't "judgment" in the sense that you're implying.  It's simply saying that this sort of imaginary deity isn't the Deity.  Neither is Odin or Shiva, but I don't presume to judge the souls of those who worship them.

If folks wish to trade the truth for a lie, talk TO them, not about them,

This is a discussion board.  Someone asked a question about Mormons and we discussed their theology and attempts at mainstreaming in relation to the OP.

Analyzing the Mormon belief system is not "talking about" individual believers in the sense your words imply.  Further, non-Orthodox have always been welcome to discuss and debate theology to their heart's content on these boards.  Further still, discussing theology on these boards doesn't preclude the possibility of "talking to" people of other faiths on these boards or in real life.

and rather talk/post, live the life that models what He asks us which is not just talk.

Don't presume to know what kind of lives we live based on what you're reading into our posts here.


To many of my fellow Orthodox speak poorly of others in their religious life and that bothers me greatly.

Who here has spoken poorly of the spiritual lives of others?  Who pretends to know their piety, their prayer life, or what they do behind closed doors? Does this mean, however, that we can't examine their doctrine?  Does it mean that we should shun comparative theology as a form of "judgment"?

We  do not denigrate those that are invalids; I would rather hear about the good that Orthodox brings to us, as oppose to studying others to find their faults.

Finding faults in theological traditions does not equate to finding fault with individuals or presuming to judge the state of their souls.

Lord, forgive my foolish pride, but enough of this idle chatter.

Indeed.  Amen.

Did you follow your own advice here, Len?  You had a problem with my post, so did you heed your own words and "talk TO me not ABOUT me"?  Or did you decline to address me lovingly and directly, preferring instead to simply hold my post up before the world as an example of what not to do, an example of what enkindles your wrath and makes your blood boil? Did you heed your own call to refrain from engaging in such discussions at all opting instead to live an exemplary life and call me to repentance through your shining example? Or did you decide to launch into a diatribe and make a failed attempt at upbraiding me?

Hey buddy. Don't you know THIS IS THE INTERWEBS! We don't want no reasoned discourse in these parts. Now ride on outta town...preferably by sunset.  ;)   ;)

Offline Nephi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,825
  • A non-Chalcedonian in Chalcedonian clothing.
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #47 on: November 17, 2014, 10:49:22 PM »
arch-WASP

"Arch-WASR" might be more apt, although less easy to say.

What's WASR?

I don't know what they R stands for, but I take his point that they're not Protestant.

I'd hazard a guess that R stands for Restorationist.

Yep. :)

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #48 on: November 17, 2014, 11:08:46 PM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #49 on: November 18, 2014, 08:30:51 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

That's just sick.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #50 on: November 18, 2014, 09:02:02 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

That's just sick.
Just in case you want to finish throwing up your breakfast......

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1992/02/the-divinely-inspired-constitution?lang=eng

Cheers :)

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #51 on: November 18, 2014, 09:11:43 AM »
I am sorry you were offended and did not mean this to be an ad hominem argument but rather boosting one's religious beliefs over another is what gets my goat. It is my poor writing and communication skills that have brought this all down upon me.  So besides addressing my passions I must also work on clarification in communication skills.
It is not my intention to "judge" people's souls and I apologize for seeming to do so. Again, it is climbing up on the hill to examine dogma, etc. to show others that "mine" is better than yours" and you are right as it is not fair nor even possible to equate the distinction between folks' souls and the teachings they listen to. The logic fails me, obviously, as you declare folks, Mormons in this case, have a false god, false and empty teachings and yet are not going to hell. Mormons are not "bad" people, anymore than any other as all fall short of.....but do they fall "shorter"? I suppose my faith is not as strong or sure as others. I know there's a place in hell reserved for me however I believe that if I "do right" that I can get to heaven. I cannot say for another no matter how they proceed or in what the constellation of their faith may be.
You are right, this is a discussion board and the freedom to examine anything is fair game and, again, I apologize. I was not trying to limit in any way the discussions; I was simply trying to point out that I get tired of folks putting down or deriding others' dogmas, faiths, etc, to tout their own understanding of Orthodoxy in the vain attempt to certify or aggrandize such, or possibly themselves.
I do presume to know how others live on this website only because I know my life, what is in my heart and my faith struggles. Although there are brief moments when I 'fold' into God, thanks to my Orthodox
faith, for the most part it is dragging my sins around like the dead weight of meat. And for such I presume others may have a similar way. Forgive me if you have gone beyond that as I find it rare around these parts.
I chose to "upbraid" you as you have a many many posts and figured that you could respond appropriately. Truthfully, and poorly, it was not my intention to start a flame but rather give an example of what "boils" my blood, which is simply the degradation of another system rather than the affirmation of ours.
My sincere apologies for the upset. Please forgive my poor logic and writing skills.

Below are some of the things that really get my passions in an uproar regarding Orthodoxy: judgment.

Well, perhaps you should work on quelling those passions.  Frankly, the faux-indignation routine you're expressing here is as irksome to me as the perceived "judgment" you're reading into my post is to you.  It's not fair to equate those who make distinctions between teachings and doctrines with those who presume to judge people's souls.  I've re-read my post as you've cited it below.  It definitely falls into the former category.  Nowhere did I say that Mormons were bad people or that they were going to hell.  What I said is simply that they are not Christians and that their god is not God.

Is it "judgment" to state that the god of Mormonism is not our God?  Let's examine his characteristics:

+He was born a man of flesh and blood on the planet Kolob.
+He conceives his children (plural) through natural sex with a number of wives.
+He is one of a number of gods, each of whom rules his own planet.

Stating that this is not our God and that those who worship this false deity aren't Christians isn't "judgment" in the sense that you're implying.  It's simply saying that this sort of imaginary deity isn't the Deity.  Neither is Odin or Shiva, but I don't presume to judge the souls of those who worship them.

If folks wish to trade the truth for a lie, talk TO them, not about them,

This is a discussion board.  Someone asked a question about Mormons and we discussed their theology and attempts at mainstreaming in relation to the OP.

Analyzing the Mormon belief system is not "talking about" individual believers in the sense your words imply.  Further, non-Orthodox have always been welcome to discuss and debate theology to their heart's content on these boards.  Further still, discussing theology on these boards doesn't preclude the possibility of "talking to" people of other faiths on these boards or in real life.

and rather talk/post, live the life that models what He asks us which is not just talk.

Don't presume to know what kind of lives we live based on what you're reading into our posts here.


To many of my fellow Orthodox speak poorly of others in their religious life and that bothers me greatly.

Who here has spoken poorly of the spiritual lives of others?  Who pretends to know their piety, their prayer life, or what they do behind closed doors? Does this mean, however, that we can't examine their doctrine?  Does it mean that we should shun comparative theology as a form of "judgment"?

We  do not denigrate those that are invalids; I would rather hear about the good that Orthodox brings to us, as oppose to studying others to find their faults.

Finding faults in theological traditions does not equate to finding fault with individuals or presuming to judge the state of their souls.

Lord, forgive my foolish pride, but enough of this idle chatter.

Indeed.  Amen.

Did you follow your own advice here, Len?  You had a problem with my post, so did you heed your own words and "talk TO me not ABOUT me"?  Or did you decline to address me lovingly and directly, preferring instead to simply hold my post up before the world as an example of what not to do, an example of what enkindles your wrath and makes your blood boil? Did you heed your own call to refrain from engaging in such discussions at all opting instead to live an exemplary life and call me to repentance through your shining example? Or did you decide to launch into a diatribe and make a failed attempt at upbraiding me?
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #52 on: November 18, 2014, 09:28:18 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.
PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

Not Mormon, never have been nor will be BUT I can reason out that The Constitution has the breath of God in it!
For mere men to give up and strategize to limit the one thing that all men seek, power, and come up with a way to keep it in check IS divinely inspired; especially in light of the countries they were surrounded by with kings, serfs, state religions and slavery being "the norm" for all centuries past.
If one does not see the spark of divine inspiration then there really is no argument, one simply does not see it. If one does not have the ability to taste strawberry then what good are words to do so?
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #53 on: November 18, 2014, 10:15:25 AM »
Quote
Not Mormon, never have been nor will be BUT I can reason out that The Constitution has the breath of God in it!
That makes 1 of us....

Quote
If one does not see the spark of divine inspiration then there really is no argument
The constitution is not divinely inspired. Period.

Quote
If one does not have the ability to taste strawberry then what good are words to do so?
Some taste strawberry instead of the feces they're eating.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #54 on: November 18, 2014, 10:16:57 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

That's just sick.
Just in case you want to finish throwing up your breakfast......

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1992/02/the-divinely-inspired-constitution?lang=eng

Cheers :)

PP

Interesting. The author seems to be working with a pretty weak definition of "divinely inspired", e.g. he doesn't consider every word of the Constitution to be inerrant. It's more like how mainline Protestants interpret Scripture, rather than evangelical Protestants.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #55 on: November 18, 2014, 10:20:10 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

That's just sick.
Just in case you want to finish throwing up your breakfast......

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1992/02/the-divinely-inspired-constitution?lang=eng

Cheers :)

PP

Interesting. The author seems to be working with a pretty weak definition of "divinely inspired", e.g. he doesn't consider every word of the Constitution to be inerrant. It's more like how mainline Protestants interpret Scripture, rather than evangelical Protestants.
Yeah. To me, it looks like he was trying to dance on both sides of a very thin line as to not offend anybody. I know quite a few Mormons who will straight out say that the Constitution is divinely inspired only slightly less than scripture.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #56 on: November 18, 2014, 10:34:24 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.
PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

Not Mormon, never have been nor will be BUT I can reason out that The Constitution has the breath of God in it!
For mere men to give up and strategize to limit the one thing that all men seek, power, and come up with a way to keep it in check IS divinely inspired; especially in light of the countries they were surrounded by with kings, serfs, state religions and slavery being "the norm" for all centuries past.
If one does not see the spark of divine inspiration then there really is no argument, one simply does not see it. If one does not have the ability to taste strawberry then what good are words to do so?
It has the breath of God in it in the same way that the Magna Carta, Code of Hammurabi and Locke's Two Treatises concerning Government have the breath of God in them.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2014, 10:34:41 AM by TheTrisagion »
God bless!

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #57 on: November 18, 2014, 11:06:40 AM »
Just in case you want to finish throwing up your breakfast......

Thanks!  I still had a little oatmeal left down deep that I hadn't quite purged the last time.  ;D

I am sorry you were offended and did not mean this to be an ad hominem argument

Len, here you apologize, but then you continue below to write in the precisely the same vein as before.  I still think you're misapprehending if not deliberately misrepresenting my position.

but rather boosting one's religious beliefs over another is what gets my goat.

Then trust that your goat is safe, because that's not what I was doing.  Orthodoxy doesn't need a "boost" from me our anyone to transcend Mormonism.  Truth is naturally superior to falsehood.  But perhaps you mean that I am bragging or boasting in my faith?

Let us be clear: it is not fair to characterize clarification as boasting.

If I state that Sidney Reilly and James Bond are not the same individual, is that boasting?  Further, if I state that while Sidney Reilly may have served as the inspiration for James Bond, the former is real and the latter is a fictional character, is that boasting?  Or is all of this merely stating the facts?

If I state that there is only one true God and that all other "gods" are idols, is that boasting or simply stating a fact?  If I declare that God is real and the god of Kolob is not, is this boasting?  If I declare that God the Father was not born a man on another planet and does not have sex with human women, including (and I can barely bring myself to type this hideous blasphemy) the Theotokos, is that boasting?  Or is all of this merely stating the facts?

Loving someone and declining to judge the condition of their heart or whether or not they are going to hell does not mean that we have to shrug our shoulders and pretend we're agnostic when it comes to their teachings.

Again, it is climbing up on the hill to examine dogma, etc. to show others that "mine" is better than yours"

Comparative theology is not about "climbing up on the hill" to show that "mine's better than yours".  It is not about exalting ourselves because we have done nothing to deserve that which we have inherited or made a choice for.  "Mine" and "yours" doesn't enter into it.  It's more like, I love you and I want you to share in the treasure that I have been blessed to partake of despite my unworthiness.  I love you, and I want you to stop drinking poison and start drinking Life.

Allowing folks to obfusticate and blur the distinction between the Living God and a false deity, as the present Mormon PR campaign attempts to do, is not the loving thing to do.  It benefits no one, but rather might lead those of simple faith astray.  We can still love our Mormon - or Hindu, or New Age Spiritualist - brothers and sisters while acknowledging that their gods are not our God.

Mormons in this case, have a false god, false and empty teachings and yet are not going to hell. Mormons are not "bad" people, anymore than any other as all fall short of.....but do they fall "shorter"?

I don't have a Heaven or a Hell to put anyone in and neither do you.  I don't think it's our place to say how "short" anyone falls but ourselves. It's possible that many Mormons, Buddhists, and practitioners of Voudou - having never known the True Faith - will make it into Heaven before my weak and unworthy self.

I cannot say for another no matter how they proceed or in what the constellation of their faith may be.

Could you please clarify what you mean here by "the constellation of their faith".

I was simply trying to point out that I get tired of folks putting down or deriding others' dogmas, faiths, etc, to tout their own understanding of Orthodoxy in the vain attempt to certify or aggrandize such, or possibly themselves.

I absolutely was not doing this, Len.  I resent the characterization of my post as such and will not allow it to stand.  If this was your intent then you picked the wrong post and the wrong person to attempt to make an example of.  To apologize for this with one breath and then to continue to mischaracterize what I have written as what you describe above with the next is wrong and I don't appreciate it.

I do presume to know how others live on this website only because I know my life, what is in my heart and my faith struggles. Although there are brief moments when I 'fold' into God, thanks to my Orthodox faith, for the most part it is dragging my sins around like the dead weight of meat. And for such I presume others may have a similar way.

Len, being presumptuous is just that.  Your experience is not everyone's experience and your struggle is not everyone's struggle.  Let's not play around here, let's be real and precise.  The part of your post that initiated this part of our dialogue was the bit where you suggested that rather than posting here about theology people should be living an exemplary life, to which I replied that you should not presume to know how any of us posting here live.  You don't.  It's not accurate for you to impose your experiences and struggles on us.  We have our own.  It's also not fair or accurate for you to suggest that posting here about doctrine means that we couldn't possibly also be living our Faith.  You're creating a false dichotomy and it just doesn't fly.  

Forgive me if you have gone beyond that as I find it rare around these parts.

Again, this is not fair.  Saying that you shouldn't presume to know the state of my life is not the same as saying that I've achieved theosis or that I think I've "moved beyond" sin and struggle, have attained to a higher state of consciousness, evolved into a Igglybuff or anything else.  All it means is that you should stop projecting your issues onto me and stop suggesting that because I've posted something on here about Mormon doctrine that I "think I'm better than" Mormons.  It's not fair and I'm not having it.

I chose to "upbraid" you as you have a many many posts and figured that you could respond appropriately. Truthfully, and poorly, it was not my intention to start a flame but rather give an example of what "boils" my blood, which is simply the degradation of another system rather than the affirmation of ours.

There are plenty of threads on these boards that affirm Orthodoxy.  In this thread, the OP asked specific questions about the mainstreaming of Mormonism in America.  I and other posters responded appropriately.  Would you suggest that an appropriate response to a question about whether or not Mormons are trying to mainstream their faith would be most appropriately answered with a discussion about the merits of Orthodoxy?

Question: So, do you think this could be some kind of a Mormon plot?
Answer: Orthodoxy is awesome!

Does that seem an appropriate response to you on a discussion board?

We're not "degrading another system", but simply pointing out that attempts to pass that system off as something it is not (Christianity) are disingenuous.

My sincere apologies for the upset. Please forgive my poor logic and writing skills.

God forgives, Len.  I forgive.  But that does not mean that I'll allow you to misrepresent what I've written in order to illustrate some point you feel needs proving.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2014, 11:33:54 AM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #58 on: November 18, 2014, 11:21:07 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.
PP

That is an official Mormon teaching.

Not Mormon, never have been nor will be BUT I can reason out that The Constitution has the breath of God in it!
For mere men to give up and strategize to limit the one thing that all men seek, power, and come up with a way to keep it in check IS divinely inspired; especially in light of the countries they were surrounded by with kings, serfs, state religions and slavery being "the norm" for all centuries past.
If one does not see the spark of divine inspiration then there really is no argument, one simply does not see it. If one does not have the ability to taste strawberry then what good are words to do so?
It has the breath of God in it in the same way that the Magna Carta, Code of Hammurabi and Locke's Two Treatises concerning Government have the breath of God in them.

Right.  Or transcendent artwork.  That doesn't elevate it at all to the level of Scripture or make the United States some divinely inspired holy empire, especially in the fanciful way that folks like Beck suggest.

An article discussing this idea here:

Quote
Over these recent years I have heard frequently from conservatives (especially those of a secular persuasion) that the US Constitution is a divinely inspired document, as though God wrote it as He wrote the Ten Commandments.

This assertion is also a part of the popularly held pretension that America is an extension of ancient Israel.

One of the main propagators of these ideas, is Glenn Beck. He said that:

"It is God’s finger that wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. "

To make his point, Beck use false historical narrative, which no historian would support, saying ideas in light of his assertion that America is an extension of Israel:

"The Israelites, the lost ten tribes, started to scatter the other direction, they went to the coastlines, generally in the area where are pilgrims came from. Judah kept the Torah alive, those who were taken captive by the Assyrians(Caucasians) they started to populate the Western part of Europe. All of Western civilization is based on the laws of Israel. "

It would be beyond any formidable historian, to even think of such a fantasy to be regarded as history. Many of his sycophants would benefit reading actual history: before Christianity came to England, the British were savage heathens, they did not have the Law of Moses; it was the priests, named Cedd and Chad, who first brought the Faith to the pagan Mercians, who lived in England; and Christianity first significantly permeated England when the pagan British king, Lucius, was baptized by Pope Eleutherus in 156 AD, many centuries before the Puritans were ever founded.

http://shoebat.com/2013/09/25/us-constitution-inspired-god/
« Last Edit: November 18, 2014, 11:27:29 AM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #59 on: November 18, 2014, 11:27:27 AM »
Quote
"It is God’s finger that wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. "
Translated from Reformed Egyptian, no less.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #60 on: November 18, 2014, 01:06:53 PM »
Not Mormon, never have been nor will be BUT I can reason out that The Constitution has the breath of God in it!
For mere men to give up and strategize to limit the one thing that all men seek, power, and come up with a way to keep it in check IS divinely inspired; especially in light of the countries they were surrounded by with kings, serfs, state religions and slavery being "the norm" for all centuries past.
If one does not see the spark of divine inspiration then there really is no argument, one simply does not see it. If one does not have the ability to taste strawberry then what good are words to do so?
It has the breath of God in it in the same way that the Magna Carta, Code of Hammurabi and Locke's Two Treatises concerning Government have the breath of God in them.
[/quote]

I like that quote "God is the Life of All Free Beings" and in the sense and documents mentioned above, yes, the Breath and Freedom of God is in all those documents that give us freedom, which is as close to God as Love in my findings.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #61 on: November 18, 2014, 04:31:49 PM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

There is no doubt that God has blessed countries and peoples here and there throughout history, even the US.  But Glenn Beck is only repeating a commonly-held American Evangelical political belief that the country exists by divine right.



Exactly.  I believe this country was masonic to begin with and was founded on many masonic principles.  (not all but many).

George Washington in the photo above, Free Mason to the core.  Most of the signers of the Constitution were Free Masons.     It's also a fact that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young ("founders" of Mormonism) were both freemasons.   Mormon worship mirrors freemasonry in many ways.  Mormonism and Freemasonry are like kissing cousins.

It would not surprise me if Beck pushes the Mormon front a lot.  Self-Exaltation taught by the Gnostics/Freemasons/Mormons is alive and well.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,878
  • Excelsior
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #62 on: November 18, 2014, 07:33:20 PM »
Quote
"It is God’s finger that wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. "
Translated from Reformed Egyptian, no less.

PP

So, God is Coptic Orthodox after all? Neat!  :D  ;)
My only weakness is, well, never mind

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #63 on: November 18, 2014, 07:56:15 PM »
Quote
"It is God’s finger that wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. "
Translated from Reformed Egyptian, no less.

PP

So, God is Coptic Orthodox after all? Neat!  :D  ;)

These girls are more Egyptian that that crap Peepstone Joe found made.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2014, 08:01:40 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #64 on: November 19, 2014, 01:13:21 AM »
Glenn Beck is a nutcase. I've listened to his show a few times. He has had some points on certain issues before, but I get the whole feeling that he's trying to be some kind of pseudo-prophet or something. He killed me when he said that the American Constitution was divinely inspired like scripture.

PP

There is no doubt that God has blessed countries and peoples here and there throughout history, even the US.  But Glenn Beck is only repeating a commonly-held American Evangelical political belief that the country exists by divine right.



Exactly.  I believe this country was masonic to begin with and was founded on many masonic principles.  (not all but many).

George Washington in the photo above, Free Mason to the core.  Most of the signers of the Constitution were Free Masons.     It's also a fact that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young ("founders" of Mormonism) were both freemasons.   Mormon worship mirrors freemasonry in many ways.  Mormonism and Freemasonry are like kissing cousins.

It would not surprise me if Beck pushes the Mormon front a lot.  Self-Exaltation taught by the Gnostics/Freemasons/Mormons is alive and well.

Lol, "photo".

And Beck is a Mormon, so it's not surprising.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2014, 01:13:39 AM by hecma925 »
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #65 on: November 19, 2014, 01:23:19 AM »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #66 on: November 19, 2014, 09:51:54 AM »
Len, here you apologize, but then you continue below to write in the precisely the same vein as before.  I still think you're misapprehending if not deliberately misrepresenting my position.

Me thinks there is a misapprehension

but rather boosting one's religious beliefs over another is what gets my goat.

Then trust that your goat is safe, because that's not what I was doing.  Orthodoxy doesn't need a "boost" from me our anyone to transcend Mormonism.  Truth is naturally superior to falsehood.  But perhaps you mean that I am bragging or boasting in my faith?
Let us be clear: it is not fair to characterize clarification as boasting.
If I state that Sidney Reilly and James Bond are not the same individual, is that boasting?  Further, if I state that while Sidney Reilly may have served as the inspiration for James Bond, the former is real and the latter is a fictional character, is that boasting?  Or is all of this merely stating the facts?

If I state that there is only one true God and that all other "gods" are idols, is that boasting or simply stating a fact?  If I declare that God is real and the god of Kolob is not, is this boasting?  If I declare that God the Father was not born a man on another planet and does not have sex with human women, including (and I can barely bring myself to type this hideous blasphemy) the Theotokos, is that boasting?  Or is all of this merely stating the facts?
Loving someone and declining to judge the condition of their heart or whether or not they are going to hell does not mean that we have to shrug our shoulders and pretend we're agnostic when it comes to their teachings.

As you point out facts are indisputable on the face of it. It is the manipulation and meaning one draws from those facts that gives others the "self righteous" position and brings separations and stiff to the fore. And, lets face facts, when it comes to the very basic relationship between one's relationship to the universe, how & why one looks at it and the practices created in order to relate, understand and learn to live in and with the existential world, that really pushes the anger passion in light of derision or given the aspiration of "abomination". Or at least that is one thing that history can teach.

Again, it is climbing up on the hill to examine dogma, etc. to show others that "mine" is better than yours"
Comparative theology is not about "climbing up on the hill" to show that "mine's better than yours".  It is not about exalting ourselves because we have done nothing to deserve that which we have inherited or made a choice for.  "Mine" and "yours" doesn't enter into it.  It's more like, I love you and I want you to share in the treasure that I have been blessed to partake of despite my unworthiness.  I love you, and I want you to stop drinking poison and start drinking Life.
Allowing folks to obfusticate and blur the distinction between the Living God and a false deity, as the present Mormon PR campaign attempts to do, is not the loving thing to do.  It benefits no one, but rather might lead those of simple faith astray.  We can still love our Mormon - or Hindu, or New Age Spiritualist - brothers and sisters while acknowledging that their gods are not our God.

I agree with so much of the above, however please allow a feeble attempt to clarify; as individuals and Orthodox we cannot and try not to exalt one's self moment by moment since we have that selfish nature displayed even as babies (my wife calls it survival instinct), however in "allowing folks to obfuscate" collectively, not as individuals, it does raise that barrier  thus giving rise to passions. Yes, we can love as individuals folks of other faiths, but in our "religion" history indicates there are problems. The very word "religion" means to bind one's self to others" which means there is an immediate separation. It saddens me that I find to much disparaging of others where I am and in many forums here.
Brief story: I've a friend with PTSD from his service in the military and he is getting help and gov't money but has to go to meetings where he is not allowed to talk about his "religion" per gov't regs. It was suggested he talk about his faith and now he is free to do so.

Mormons in this case, have a false god, false and empty teachings and yet are not going to hell. Mormons are not "bad" people, anymore than any other as all fall short of.....but do they fall "shorter"?

I don't have a Heaven or a Hell to put anyone in and neither do you.  I don't think it's our place to say how "short" anyone falls but ourselves. It's possible that many Mormons, Buddhists, and practitioners of Voudou - having never known the True Faith - will make it into Heaven before my weak and unworthy self.

WE TOTALLY AGREE!!!!!
I guess I've been reading with one eye and listening with only one ear!

I cannot say for another no matter how they proceed or in what the constellation of their faith may be.

Could you please clarify what you mean here by "the constellation of their faith".

Praxis and dogma, maybe?
One star does not a constellation make and without that one star it would not be a constellation.
For example, if we left out The Theotokas we could not be Orthodox and as Orthodox there are many things that make us such.
Simple as I can make it, I hope.

I was simply trying to point out that I get tired of folks putting down or deriding others' dogmas, faiths, etc, to tout their own understanding of Orthodoxy in the vain attempt to certify or aggrandize such, or possibly themselves.

I absolutely was not doing this, Len.  I resent the characterization of my post as such and will not allow it to stand.  If this was your intent then you picked the wrong post and the wrong person to attempt to make an example of.  To apologize for this with one breath and then to continue to mischaracterize what I have written as what you describe above with the next is wrong and I don't appreciate it.

Please, except my poor attempt to shout over your head, not to offend you personally, but to get a point to others, in my then unashamed use of your post. I had no intention of mischaracterizing you as one of stature on this forum and I apologize again for "using" you or embarrassing either of us in this exchange, although now it is I who is embarrassed due to my gross use of "using" others.
Maybe we can rejoice in knowing this misanthrope is to fine and comfortable in this fallen world though thrashing about misaligning others while gnawing on his brother? Please forgive.

I do presume to know how others live on this website only because I know my life, what is in my heart and my faith struggles. Although there are brief moments when I 'fold' into God, thanks to my Orthodox faith, for the most part it is dragging my sins around like the dead weight of meat. And for such I presume others may have a similar way.

Len, being presumptuous is just that.  Your experience is not everyone's experience and your struggle is not everyone's struggle.  Let's not play around here, let's be real and precise.  The part of your post that initiated this part of our dialogue was the bit where you suggested that rather than posting here about theology people should be living an exemplary life, to which I replied that you should not presume to know how any of us posting here live.  You don't.  It's not accurate for you to impose your experiences and struggles on us.  We have our own.  It's also not fair or accurate for you to suggest that posting here about doctrine means that we couldn't possibly also be living our Faith.  You're creating a false dichotomy and it just doesn't fly.

I took a POV that simply reveals my "liberal" education which is based on something Erasmus once penned, " All that which is human is not foreign to me".
No, I cannot "know" another's personal struggles  and experiences in detail or judge in any measure their life of faith, even if I were to walk and talk with them for a month. One proof is our marriage of 35 years as we still talk and walk and mysteriously "know" each other's personal struggles barely!
However, back to initial POV and presumption, there is nothing humans may think, know and even do that is not foreign to another human being as the commonality of being human, in all our strength and weaknesses is what makes us HUMAN, and that is the shared experience, not the individuals, which I presume.

I chose to "upbraid" you as you have a many many posts and figured that you could respond appropriately. Truthfully, and poorly, it was not my intention to start a flame but rather give an example of what "boils" my blood, which is simply the degradation of another system rather than the affirmation of ours.

There are plenty of threads on these boards that affirm Orthodoxy.  In this thread, the OP asked specific questions about the mainstreaming of Mormonism in America.  I and other posters responded appropriately.  Would you suggest that an appropriate response to a question about whether or not Mormons are trying to mainstream their faith would be most appropriately answered with a discussion about the merits of Orthodoxy?

Question: So, do you think this could be some kind of a Mormon plot?
Answer: Orthodoxy is awesome!

Fair start. or even YES, all religions wish to have others join them. Nothing new here folks, move along.
Do I think Protestants, Al Queda, RC and Christians everywhere are "plotting" to spread "their" way of life?
Holy smokes, Batman!
Idle chatter.

My sincere apologies for the upset. Please forgive my poor logic and writing skills.

God forgives, Len.  I forgive.  But that does not mean that I'll allow you to misrepresent what I've written in order to illustrate some point you feel needs proving.

God forgave me prior to my birth and I can breath easily that you can do.
Again, forgive me for mischaracterizing and disparaging you, for "using" your post to make my upsets  known, and for my poor misuse of this thread on my selfish issues.
I hope this becomes "no harm, no foul".
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #67 on: November 19, 2014, 09:56:09 AM »
WOW.  Made me smile.
I know I'm sick 'cause I like it! Maybe it should say, "Let's go have a beer too, eh"?
Oh, wait, they're Mormon!
Seriously, they need our prayers even more so!

Lol, "photo".

Oh, that's nothing....


« Last Edit: November 19, 2014, 09:56:58 AM by LenInSebastopol »
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #68 on: November 19, 2014, 10:54:10 AM »
Me thinks there is a misapprehension

Okay.  Let's continue to try to understand one another then.  :)

As you point out facts are indisputable on the face of it. It is the manipulation and meaning one draws from those facts that gives others the "self righteous" position and brings separations and stiff to the fore.

Three questions:

1. In what way do you think I'm "manipulating" the facts I've stated about the Mormon god?
2. What meaning do you feel I've assigned to those facts?
3. In what way have I demonstrated "self-righteousness"?

Please demonstrate how I've been manipulative, insincere, and self-righteous in this discussion.

And, lets face facts, when it comes to the very basic relationship between one's relationship to the universe, how & why one looks at it and the practices created in order to relate, understand and learn to live in and with the existential world, that really pushes the anger passion in light of derision or given the aspiration of "abomination". Or at least that is one thing that history can teach.

People find all kinds of ways to relate to the universe they live in, but thunder and lightning aren't the work of Zeus or Thor and we don't have to pretend they are or that we are agnostic on the subject in order to show love those who do.

I agree with so much of the above, however please allow a feeble attempt to clarify; as individuals and Orthodox we cannot and try not to exalt one's self moment by moment since we have that selfish nature displayed even as babies (my wife calls it survival instinct), however in "allowing folks to obfuscate" collectively, not as individuals, it does raise that barrier  thus giving rise to passions. Yes, we can love as individuals folks of other faiths, but in our "religion" history indicates there are problems. The very word "religion" means to bind one's self to others" which means there is an immediate separation. It saddens me that I find to much disparaging of others where I am and in many forums here.

Please demonstrate how I have disparaged another human being in the block of text you quoted from me that ignited our discussion.  Please also demonstrate how one might differentiate between truth and falsehood when it comes to religious doctrine without the disparagement that you're reading into my posts.  Am I obliged not to mention the differences between God and the Mormon deity for fear of disparaging someone who might believe in the latter?

Brief story: I've a friend with PTSD from his service in the military and he is getting help and gov't money but has to go to meetings where he is not allowed to talk about his "religion" per gov't regs. It was suggested he talk about his faith and now he is free to do so.

And now it seems you're pretty much telling me not to talk about my Faith here, at least as far as it comes to differentiating between the God I love and worship and the "gods" worshipped by others. I'm not allowed to proclaim the truth of Christ because it might conflict with someone else's "truth".  I'm confused about what you'd like to see me do in this discussion, Len.

WE TOTALLY AGREE!!!!!
I guess I've been reading with one eye and listening with only one ear!

I'm glad we agree.  :)

Praxis and dogma, maybe?
One star does not a constellation make and without that one star it would not be a constellation.
For example, if we left out The Theotokas we could not be Orthodox and as Orthodox there are many things that make us such.
Simple as I can make it, I hope.

Okay, so then by saying we can't say how they proceed in their constellation, you're saying that we shouldn't be able to make distinctions between their praxis and dogma and our own?  Or that saying that one way is right and the other is wrong is something we should also remain agnostic about, like the condition of their souls and whether they stand or fall before God?

Please, except my poor attempt to shout over your head, not to offend you personally, but to get a point to others, in my then unashamed use of your post. I had no intention of mischaracterizing you as one of stature on this forum and I apologize again for "using" you or embarrassing either of us in this exchange, although now it is I who is embarrassed due to my gross use of "using" others.
Maybe we can rejoice in knowing this misanthrope is to fine and comfortable in this fallen world though thrashing about misaligning others while gnawing on his brother? Please forgive.

Please forgive me too if my reaction has been to strident.

I took a POV that simply reveals my "liberal" education which is based on something Erasmus once penned, " All that which is human is not foreign to me".
No, I cannot "know" another's personal struggles  and experiences in detail or judge in any measure their life of faith, even if I were to walk and talk with them for a month. One proof is our marriage of 35 years as we still talk and walk and mysteriously "know" each other's personal struggles barely!
However, back to initial POV and presumption, there is nothing humans may think, know and even do that is not foreign to another human being as the commonality of being human, in all our strength and weaknesses is what makes us HUMAN, and that is the shared experience, not the individuals, which I presume.

So the implication in your initial statement was that those who are posting here concerning religious doctrine would be better served by leaving their keypad, fasting, and praying?  Who could argue with this?  But then, should you and I quit the boards?  Should everyone?  Should we refrain from commentary on any topic here related to heterodox doctrine ever again?

Fair start. or even YES, all religions wish to have others join them. Nothing new here folks, move along.
Do I think Protestants, Al Queda, RC and Christians everywhere are "plotting" to spread "their" way of life?
Holy smokes, Batman!
Idle chatter.

JewishVoice had a sincere question when he started this thread.  Something was on his mind and a felt he needed an answer.  Is it really your place to assign the label of "idle chatter" to that which so concerned him?  Is it your place to dismiss as judgmental and hard-hearted those who would seek to answer him?

God forgave me prior to my birth and I can breath easily that you can do.
Again, forgive me for mischaracterizing and disparaging you, for "using" your post to make my upsets  known, and for my poor misuse of this thread on my selfish issues.
I hope this becomes "no harm, no foul".

Amen and amen.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,548
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #69 on: November 19, 2014, 05:53:44 PM »

Let's stay on topic, and reserve the political discussion for the Politics Section.

LizaSymonenko
Global Moderator
Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #70 on: November 20, 2014, 10:41:42 AM »
As you point out facts are indisputable on the face of it. It is the manipulation and meaning one draws from those facts that gives others the "self righteous" position and brings separations and stiff to the fore.

Three questions:

1. In what way do you think I'm "manipulating" the facts I've stated about the Mormon god?
2. What meaning do you feel I've assigned to those facts?
3. In what way have I demonstrated "self-righteousness"?
Please demonstrate how I've been manipulative, insincere, and self-righteous in this discussion.

#3 Q: For example, this very post!
The tone, the pursuit after begging forgiveness, the inability to let the issue go, the detailed and in-your-face attitude indicated in a point-by-point manner,  show a self-righteousness that shall or will not be surpassed. I sense you will not allow a conciliatory note to pass until you are satisfied completely, which, by pursuit of the matter, is not easily placated.
#2 Q: I thought I was clear in my last post, but the only thing found is my inability to communicate. Please: facts are not in dispute. The Mormon characteristics of their perception of god is not what is in question. The clear inference drawn is that those that do not believe the way another does are subject to hell on the face of it.
#1 Q: My poor choice of the word you highlighted in red (the color of passion) is what is focused upon. My apology again, as tiresome as it has become.

Your sincerity is not in dispute.

I agree with so much of the above, however please allow a feeble attempt to clarify; as individuals and Orthodox we cannot and try not to exalt one's self moment by moment since we have that selfish nature displayed even as babies (my wife calls it survival instinct), however in "allowing folks to obfuscate" collectively, not as individuals, it does raise that barrier  thus giving rise to passions. Yes, we can love as individuals folks of other faiths, but in our "religion" history indicates there are problems. The very word "religion" means to bind one's self to others" which means there is an immediate separation. It saddens me that I find to much disparaging of others where I am and in many forums here.

Please demonstrate how I have disparaged another human being in the block of text you quoted from me that ignited our discussion.  Please also demonstrate how one might differentiate between truth and falsehood when it comes to religious doctrine without the disparagement that you're reading into my posts.  Am I obliged not to mention the differences between God and the Mormon deity for fear of disparaging someone who might believe in the latter?

Thank you for helping me clarify my writings. You spur me on to write clearly even in my dotage.
You did not disparage another human being. The last use of the word 'others'  in the above retort was not toward individuals, but rather the religion of others, collectively.

As to your last question, yes, you are obliged not to disparage another individual in their faith. What good is your opinion (contained in the definition of disparaged) when tearing down and degrading another person's faith? Does it serve any good whatsoever? This is the central point of my initial post. We are to fear since the opposite is to "boldly go" which is not the meaning of teaching another the love of Christ. One does not lead another out of their darkness by feeling obliged to disparage another's relationship to all they know and understand, even when it is in error. Such is pride if done any other way rather than by His Way, which has no disparaging or obligatory method.

Brief story: I've a friend with PTSD from his service in the military and he is getting help and gov't money but has to go to meetings where he is not allowed to talk about his "religion" per gov't regs. It was suggested he talk about his faith and now he is free to do so.

And now it seems you're pretty much telling me not to talk about my Faith here, at least as far as it comes to differentiating between the God I love and worship and the "gods" worshipped by others. I'm not allowed to proclaim the truth of Christ because it might conflict with someone else's "truth".  I'm confused about what you'd like to see me do in this discussion, Len.

As to the above, yes, you are confused as it was the opposite of what you got. You should talk about your relationship to Christ, faith, and not about your religion. At least the federal gov't gets it!

Please forgive me too if my reaction has been to strident.
It has becoming more difficult

Fair start. or even YES, all religions wish to have others join them. Nothing new here folks, move along.
Do I think Protestants, Al Queda, RC and Christians everywhere are "plotting" to spread "their" way of life?
Holy smokes, Batman!
Idle chatter.

JewishVoice had a sincere question when he started this thread.  Something was on his mind and a felt he needed an answer.  Is it really your place to assign the label of "idle chatter" to that which so concerned him?  Is it your place to dismiss as judgmental and hard-hearted those who would seek to answer him?

How about the very name of this thread? PLOT and MORMON, each a buzz word, but in light of the the job of all Christians, whether they pass another's smell test to BE Christian or not, is to spread The Word!
Not all questions deserve an answer, especially in the  straight one-to-one Western methodology, no? Besides, I think it is St. Isaac the Syrian who gave me the "idle chatter" notion.
Which, in my NSHO this has become.
It is Confession time!
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline jewish voice

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 886
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Still dont know yet
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #71 on: November 20, 2014, 11:35:01 AM »
I only stepped out cause it started to get political and I can't post there. I wanted to discuss how I feel Glenn beck is or maybe using his channel to make people think Mormons are Christians and possibly try to win over souls.
 I really do like some of his ideas with history house. He's movie about Santa and book. I feel mmaybe the Mormon church is behind this

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #72 on: November 20, 2014, 12:14:15 PM »
#3 Q: For example, this very post!
The tone, the pursuit after begging forgiveness, the inability to let the issue go, the detailed and in-your-face attitude indicated in a point-by-point manner,  show a self-righteousness that shall or will not be surpassed. I sense you will not allow a conciliatory note to pass until you are satisfied completely, which, by pursuit of the matter, is not easily placated.

Len, you may as well be writing to yourself here.  All you've assigned to me above is present in your own posts.  I cannot excel you in the field of self-righteousness.

Tone?  How would you describe the tone of someone who employs self-deprecating language while simultaneously carrying on in an arrogant fashion, attempting to speak to the condition of other people's souls and struggles, attempting to chastise and rebuke those they do not know, reading meanings and intentions into their words that simply aren't there?

Pursuit after begging forgiveness?  How about "begging" forgiveness in one breath and then continuing to do precisely what one has just "begged" forgiveness for with the next and feigning outrage when the one you attempt to upbraid doesn't allow that to stand?

The inability to let the issue go?  The detailed and in-your-face attitude indicated in a point-by-point manner?  Pot meet kettle.  I await your point-by-point rebuttal to this post.

You shouldn't be seeking to "placate" me, Len, but you shouldn't be surprised when your same old attempted rebuke - this time with an apology chaser - followed by yet another repetition of the same attempted rebuke - is rebuffed as it was the first time.

#2 Q: I thought I was clear in my last post, but the only thing found is my inability to communicate. Please: facts are not in dispute. The Mormon characteristics of their perception of god is not what is in question. The clear inference drawn is that those that do not believe the way another does are subject to hell on the face of it.

That's not what I was asking.  We agree on the facts.  You said that I was reading a certain meaning into those facts.  I want to know what that meaning was.

#1 Q: My poor choice of the word you highlighted in red (the color of passion) is what is focused upon. My apology again, as tiresome as it has become.

It is only tiresome when it is followed by the same old accusation.  So now the color of the highlighted word has some special significance?

Thank you for helping me clarify my writings. You spur me on to write clearly even in my dotage.
You did not disparage another human being. The last use of the word 'others'  in the above retort was not toward individuals, but rather the religion of others, collectively.

These were sincere questions that have thus far remained unanswered, most especially

Quote
Please also demonstrate how one might differentiate between truth and falsehood when it comes to religious doctrine without the disparagement that you're reading into my posts.

I would think that there is a way to talk about religious doctrine - what is true in it and what is false - without being disparaging.  You seem to indicate otherwise.  I'd like to know how you think we can engage in comparative theology if declaring something to be false is in and of itself disparaging.  Or should we refrain from engaging in comparative theology altogether?

As to your last question, yes, you are obliged not to disparage another individual in their faith. What good is your opinion (contained in the definition of disparaged) when tearing down and degrading another person's faith? Does it serve any good whatsoever? This is the central point of my initial post. We are to fear since the opposite is to "boldly go" which is not the meaning of teaching another the love of Christ. One does not lead another out of their darkness by feeling obliged to disparage another's relationship to all they know and understand, even when it is in error. Such is pride if done any other way rather than by His Way, which has no disparaging or obligatory method.

Of course I would agree with that, Len, but that's not what I asked.  I asked

Quote
Am I obliged not to mention the differences between God and the Mormon deity for fear of disparaging someone who might believe in the latter?

Based on the above, your answer to that is "yes".  I cannot mention that there are differences between the Mormon god and the Christian God because to do so would be disparaging in and of itself.  To mention that two things are different is apparently inherently disparaging.

As to the above, yes, you are confused as it was the opposite of what you got. You should talk about your relationship to Christ, faith, and not about your religion.

We live our theology, Len, that is true, but this does not mean that we cannot also discuss theology when called upon to do so especially on a discussion board that exists specifically for discussion.

At least the federal gov't gets it!

They are role models for us all.

It has becoming more difficult

For you to forgive me?

How about the very name of this thread? PLOT and MORMON, each a buzz word,

I didn't name the thread, Len.  You'd have to take that up with JewishVoice.

but in light of the the job of all Christians, whether they pass another's smell test to BE Christian or not, is to spread The Word!

Pass another's test to be Christians?  Len, is there really no bare minimum to what qualifies as Christianity?

Not all questions deserve an answer, especially in the  straight one-to-one Western methodology, no?

Now you're also the judge of which questions on these boards are even fit to receive replies.  Hmm...I took him at his word and his question at face value.  I felt it merited a response.

Besides, I think it is St. Isaac the Syrian who gave me the "idle chatter" notion.

That doesn't mean you're applying it correctly or not engaging in it yourself.

Which, in my NSHO this has become.
It is Confession time!

Especially if you're having trouble forgiving me simply for not laying down and taking it when you decided to play "the voice of one crying in the internet" and make an example of me to the other Pharisees.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #73 on: November 20, 2014, 03:18:22 PM »
Quote
whether they pass another's smell test to BE Christian or not, is to spread The Word!
Please remember that when you recite The Creed on Sunday.....

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #74 on: November 20, 2014, 04:08:11 PM »
I can only bow to your clear insight and skills at seeing that I am arrogant, self righteous and conceded in my responses. Also it is vainglorious to please, refute or rebut you. You display fortitude in relentless pursuit of something I am obviously incapable of understanding, despite my best tries.
Again, you are right with the pot-kettle-black thingy, as it is futile for me to try to get over what bothers me about those that will denigrate another's POV or passion about their beliefs.
Though I do not "know" you, a blessing for us both, I cannot get across that the human issues common to all, are what continue to separate us in this exchange. It seems you wish that I "know" each person's particulars regarding their individual circumstances and I declare that I do, not as individuals but as human beings sharing sufferings, joys and even in some pains, etc.
As to Mormons and my reading into the facts you presented, I thought it meant that you considered Mormons going to hell due to their beliefs; plain and simple, but I see I am wrong in my assumption that you thought so, since we both agree that neither of us know what God thinks of each individual Mormon and their going to hell or not. This raised my curiosity, obviously out of ignorance, since the Particular and General Theory of Stuff could apply. I cannot see that theory's application so maybe you could and if so, I expect a response.
If I could too find a way to discuss religious doctrine without judgment that would be great but I cannot. It is good you can, and I look forward to it, but probably not in this missive. To hold forth on Comparative Theology without a POV is a challenge. Declarative statements on such would give a natural rise to asking questions and in so doing would "tease out" positions possibly contrary to such facts, with the bottom line coming to "diving revelation" which does not lend itself to Western scrutiny, which can be considered another POV by me as well as others.  Such issues move easily into  "what is the Nature of God' and other ontological matters but that is for another time. You ask if we should refrain from discussing comparative theology altogether. Let me ask you, does it provide fruit within the discussion circle? Does it provide light for those in the circle that either do not understand or agree with what is declared? Are the declarations of fact stated in a neutral, easy manner for discussion or declared in a way that would lend itself to passions?
Another quibble, pray it is not idle chatter, but we do not agree on definitions: we do not "live our theology" we life our faith (or at best attempt to). Do Muslims live their faith or their study of Allah? One does not live their study of God, but reflect their faith in God. IOW theology is not faith (although I wish I not to go into a long diatribe on the difference, I pray the intelligence to understand the diff).
Bare minimum to be Christian: Deuteronomy 6:20 starts it and Luke 10:27 and Mathew 22:37 finish well enough.
As it is, I lay down.
 
#3 Q: For example, this very post!
The tone, the pursuit after begging forgiveness, the inability to let the issue go, the detailed and in-your-face attitude indicated in a point-by-point manner,  show a self-righteousness that shall or will not be surpassed. I sense you will not allow a conciliatory note to pass until you are satisfied completely, which, by pursuit of the matter, is not easily placated.

Len, you may as well be writing to yourself here.  All you've assigned to me above is present in your own posts.  I cannot excel you in the field of self-righteousness.

Tone?  How would you describe the tone of someone who employs self-deprecating language while simultaneously carrying on in an arrogant fashion, attempting to speak to the condition of other people's souls and struggles, attempting to chastise and rebuke those they do not know, reading meanings and intentions into their words that simply aren't there?

Pursuit after begging forgiveness?  How about "begging" forgiveness in one breath and then continuing to do precisely what one has just "begged" forgiveness for with the next and feigning outrage when the one you attempt to upbraid doesn't allow that to stand?

The inability to let the issue go?  The detailed and in-your-face attitude indicated in a point-by-point manner?  Pot meet kettle.  I await your point-by-point rebuttal to this post.

You shouldn't be seeking to "placate" me, Len, but you shouldn't be surprised when your same old attempted rebuke - this time with an apology chaser - followed by yet another repetition of the same attempted rebuke - is rebuffed as it was the first time.

#2 Q: I thought I was clear in my last post, but the only thing found is my inability to communicate. Please: facts are not in dispute. The Mormon characteristics of their perception of god is not what is in question. The clear inference drawn is that those that do not believe the way another does are subject to hell on the face of it.

That's not what I was asking.  We agree on the facts.  You said that I was reading a certain meaning into those facts.  I want to know what that meaning was.

#1 Q: My poor choice of the word you highlighted in red (the color of passion) is what is focused upon. My apology again, as tiresome as it has become.

It is only tiresome when it is followed by the same old accusation.  So now the color of the highlighted word has some special significance?

Thank you for helping me clarify my writings. You spur me on to write clearly even in my dotage.
You did not disparage another human being. The last use of the word 'others'  in the above retort was not toward individuals, but rather the religion of others, collectively.

These were sincere questions that have thus far remained unanswered, most especially

Quote
Please also demonstrate how one might differentiate between truth and falsehood when it comes to religious doctrine without the disparagement that you're reading into my posts.

I would think that there is a way to talk about religious doctrine - what is true in it and what is false - without being disparaging.  You seem to indicate otherwise.  I'd like to know how you think we can engage in comparative theology if declaring something to be false is in and of itself disparaging.  Or should we refrain from engaging in comparative theology altogether?

As to your last question, yes, you are obliged not to disparage another individual in their faith. What good is your opinion (contained in the definition of disparaged) when tearing down and degrading another person's faith? Does it serve any good whatsoever? This is the central point of my initial post. We are to fear since the opposite is to "boldly go" which is not the meaning of teaching another the love of Christ. One does not lead another out of their darkness by feeling obliged to disparage another's relationship to all they know and understand, even when it is in error. Such is pride if done any other way rather than by His Way, which has no disparaging or obligatory method.

Of course I would agree with that, Len, but that's not what I asked.  I asked

Quote
Am I obliged not to mention the differences between God and the Mormon deity for fear of disparaging someone who might believe in the latter?

Based on the above, your answer to that is "yes".  I cannot mention that there are differences between the Mormon god and the Christian God because to do so would be disparaging in and of itself.  To mention that two things are different is apparently inherently disparaging.

As to the above, yes, you are confused as it was the opposite of what you got. You should talk about your relationship to Christ, faith, and not about your religion.

We live our theology, Len, that is true, but this does not mean that we cannot also discuss theology when called upon to do so especially on a discussion board that exists specifically for discussion.

At least the federal gov't gets it!

They are role models for us all.

It has becoming more difficult

For you to forgive me?

How about the very name of this thread? PLOT and MORMON, each a buzz word,

I didn't name the thread, Len.  You'd have to take that up with JewishVoice.

but in light of the the job of all Christians, whether they pass another's smell test to BE Christian or not, is to spread The Word!

Pass another's test to be Christians?  Len, is there really no bare minimum to what qualifies as Christianity?

Not all questions deserve an answer, especially in the  straight one-to-one Western methodology, no?

Now you're also the judge of which questions on these boards are even fit to receive replies.  Hmm...I took him at his word and his question at face value.  I felt it merited a response.

Besides, I think it is St. Isaac the Syrian who gave me the "idle chatter" notion.

That doesn't mean you're applying it correctly or not engaging in it yourself.

Which, in my NSHO this has become.
It is Confession time!

Especially if you're having trouble forgiving me simply for not laying down and taking it when you decided to play "the voice of one crying in the internet" and make an example of me to the other Pharisees.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #75 on: November 20, 2014, 04:09:43 PM »
Quote
whether they pass another's smell test to BE Christian or not, is to spread The Word!
Please remember that when you recite The Creed on Sunday.....
PP

That is why the Morning Prayers help me daily and get longer to say...so much to remember!
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #76 on: November 20, 2014, 05:32:41 PM »
Len, I think the Church determines who is a Christian,nor cherry picked Bible verses.

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

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #77 on: November 20, 2014, 07:07:31 PM »
I can only bow to your clear insight and skills at seeing that I am arrogant, self righteous and conceded in my responses. Also it is vainglorious to please, refute or rebut you. You display fortitude in relentless pursuit of something I am obviously incapable of understanding, despite my best tries.

In other words, you can dish it out but you can't take it.  You see fit to declare me self-righteous, manipulative, judgmental, et cetera - and all from simply delineating the differences between the god of Kolob and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - but when your sword is turned back upon you your only response is condescending sarcasm and a transparent "Fool for Christ" routine.

Again, you are right with the pot-kettle-black thingy, as it is futile for me to try to get over what bothers me about those that will denigrate another's POV or passion about their beliefs.

I don't know if it's futile for you to try to quell your misdirected passions, but it's unfair of you to read something into someone's post that isn't there, utilize them as an object lesson for the benefit detriment of the entire board, whine when they object, half-heartedly acknowledge that they didn't mean what you thought they meant, and then continue to rake them over the coals and condemn them for doing exactly what you just acknowledged they didn't do even as you "apologize".  You can't be a martyr and a persecutor simultaneously.

Though I do not "know" you, a blessing for us both,

Truly and absolutely.

I cannot get across that the human issues common to all, are what continue to separate us in this exchange.

Not true.  You see the critique of a given belief system as a personal judgment of all who subscribe to it.  It is not.

It seems you wish that I "know" each person's particulars regarding their individual circumstances and I declare that I do, not as individuals but as human beings sharing sufferings, joys and even in some pains, etc.

A general acknowledgment of the human condition doesn't give you grounds to declare that no human alive is fit to engage in commentary upon the world's various belief systems.  It simply doesn't follow.

As to Mormons and my reading into the facts you presented, I thought it meant that you considered Mormons going to hell due to their beliefs; plain and simple, but I see I am wrong in my assumption that you thought so, since we both agree that neither of us know what God thinks of each individual Mormon and their going to hell or not.

This is precisely what I was looking for.  Thank you, Len.

This raised my curiosity, obviously out of ignorance, since the Particular and General Theory of Stuff could apply. I cannot see that theory's application so maybe you could and if so, I expect a response.

I'm familiar with Plato's Theory of Forms, which includes the statement that particular forms are subsumed under more general forms, but I must admit that the (capital letters) "Particular and General Theory of Stuff" is beyond the pale for me.  Suffice it to say, I continue to assert that critiquing a belief system is not necessarily a condemnation of those who subscribe to it, most especially of those who do so because it is what they were raised with or all they know.

If I could too find a way to discuss religious doctrine without judgment that would be great but I cannot.

Let's try an exercise then.  Do you believe that the religion of the ancient Greeks was the true faith?  Can you find any fault with it?  If you do find any fault with it, does that necessarily mean that you believe the ancient Greeks are all burning in hell?

It is good you can, and I look forward to it, but probably not in this missive.

I have already done so in this thread.  The facts as it pertains to comparing the God of Orthodoxy with the god of Kolob are, as you say, not in dispute.  It is you who read a meaning into the facts (that the worshippers of the god of Kolob are doomed to perdition) that wasn't there.  So there we have it: religious doctrine has been discussed in this exchange without any judgment upon the faithful of a given creed implied.

To hold forth on Comparative Theology without a POV is a challenge.

And yet it has been done.  Entire textbooks have been written about it.

Declarative statements on such would give a natural rise to asking questions and in so doing would "tease out" positions possibly contrary to such facts, with the bottom line coming to "diving revelation" which does not lend itself to Western scrutiny, which can be considered another POV by me as well as others.

Baptized, March 9, 2014 and already dismissive of Western modes of thinking?  And are there no declarative statements concerning dogma emanating from the ancient East?  Was any and every theological opinion met with an agnostic shrug of the shoulders?

Such issues move easily into  "what is the Nature of God' and other ontological matters but that is for another time.

Thanks to the wonders of apophatic theology, we don't have to pretend that the unknowable nature of God means we might have to leave ourselves open to the possibility that He is actually a man from Kolob who had a beginning, has flesh, and has sex with his many wives.

You ask if we should refrain from discussing comparative theology altogether. Let me ask you, does it provide fruit within the discussion circle?

I would contend that yes, it does.  In fact, it can be a useful teaching tool.

Does it provide light for those in the circle that either do not understand or agree with what is declared?

If they do not understand, they are free to ask for clarification and we are compelled to oblige.  If they don't agree, that is their right, but that doesn't mean that we should remain mute or pretend that "all religions are different paths to God" for fear of giving offense.  That is not an act of love nor is it what Our Lord commissioned us to do.

Are the declarations of fact stated in a neutral, easy manner for discussion or declared in a way that would lend itself to passions?

It seems that the passions of some will be enflamed no matter how the facts are declared.  If there is not any condemnatory slant to their presentation, they will read one into it anyway.

Another quibble, pray it is not idle chatter, but we do not agree on definitions...

Then is it right for you to compare your definition to mine, or are you guilty of judging me by asserting that I am mistaken?

we do not "live our theology"

Lossky, Florovsky, Matta el-Meskeen, St. Seraphim of Sarov, and countless others would disagree.  What is theology?  Knowledge of God.  Knowing God.  Can one know God merely through discursive study?  Merely through books?  Now who's thinking like a Westerner?  Theology bereft of its ontological and pastoral dimension isn't theology at all.  Theology is indeed lived.

we life our faith (or at best attempt to). Do Muslims live their faith or their study of Allah? One does not live their study of God, but reflect their faith in God. IOW theology is not faith (although I wish I not to go into a long diatribe on the difference, I pray the intelligence to understand the diff).

I pray the intelligence to understand that you're creating an unnecessary and very Western false dichotomy.

Bare minimum to be Christian: Deuteronomy 6:20 starts it and Luke 10:27 and Mathew 22:37 finish well enough.

Hmmm...

Quote
In the future, when your son asks you, “What is the meaning of the stipulations, decrees and laws the Lord our God has commanded you?”

So, obey the Old Testament Law?

Quote
He answered, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

Would that be the God of the Old and New Testament, or will any old god do?  Even one who has a beginning, has flesh, and lots and lots of sex?

Quote
they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called 'Rabbi' by others.

Yes, yes they do.  "Hey, look at me!  I'm outraged because someone dared to compare two religious communities' conception of God in an internet discussion forum!  Aren't I a humble, holy, and pious individual unlike this Pharisee over here whose post ignites my passions and boils my very blood?"  

I tip my yarmulke to you, Rabbi.

As it is, I lay down.

We shall see.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2014, 07:11:53 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #78 on: November 20, 2014, 07:35:40 PM »
For what its worth, my priest does not consider non Trinitarians to be Christians, including the LDS. He has gone on to say that does not mean they are not nice people or that they don't support good works, but by our church's definition (by that I mean the Orthodox Church) they are not Christian. Even the Muslims have a place for Jesus and the Virgin Mary in their 'theology', but that hardly makes them Christian. Arians are another example, while they shared much of Christian scripture and early beliefs, when push came to shove their doctrines precluded defining them as Christian. While these examples are somewhat extreme, I think they illustrate the point.

Offline Didyma

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 345
  • St. Lawrence of Canterbury, pray for us!
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #79 on: November 20, 2014, 07:38:17 PM »
This thread is still going?
.- -. -.. / --. --- -.. / ... .... .- .-.. .-.. / .-- .. .--. . / .- .-- .- -.-- / .- .-.. .-.. / - . .- .-. ... / ..-. .-. --- -- / - .... . .. .-. / . -.-- . ...

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #80 on: November 20, 2014, 07:40:10 PM »
For what its worth, my priest does not consider non Trinitarians to be Christians, including the LDS. He has gone on to say that does not mean they are not nice people or that they don't support good works, but by our church's definition (by that I mean the Orthodox Church) they are not Christian. Even the Muslims have a place for Jesus and the Virgin Mary in their 'theology', but that hardly makes them Christian. Arians are another example, while they shared much of Christian scripture and early beliefs, when push came to shove their doctrines precluded defining them as Christian. While these examples are somewhat extreme, I think they illustrate the point.
I 100% agree with your priests thoughts on this. Well said.
God bless!

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,356
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian/GOA
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #81 on: November 20, 2014, 08:17:01 PM »
For what its worth, my priest does not consider non Trinitarians to be Christians, including the LDS. He has gone on to say that does not mean they are not nice people or that they don't support good works, but by our church's definition (by that I mean the Orthodox Church) they are not Christian. Even the Muslims have a place for Jesus and the Virgin Mary in their 'theology', but that hardly makes them Christian. Arians are another example, while they shared much of Christian scripture and early beliefs, when push came to shove their doctrines precluded defining them as Christian. While these examples are somewhat extreme, I think they illustrate the point.
That's odd, because up above, Yuri called the Arians "Arian Christians." I don't know if it was qawe or Antonious who said it, but we do we draw the line at Trinitarian vs. non-Trinitarian as a litmus test for being considered a Christian?

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

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #82 on: November 21, 2014, 09:28:16 AM »
Len, I think the Church determines who is a Christian,nor cherry picked Bible verses.
In Christ,
Andrew

I do not understand....authority is Apostolic succession...and yet I thought only God calls and knows....with the Church being made up of the people guided by The Holy Spirit, which means the Church is greater than sum of all Her parts.
I am sorry, I just do not understand your retort. I only wish I could.
=
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #83 on: November 21, 2014, 09:30:13 AM »
This thread is still going?

Mostly due to flame wars, male egos, and seeing who can have "the last word" as well as other worn out phrases based on idle chatter.
"Nothing to see hear, folks, move along".
=
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #84 on: November 21, 2014, 10:32:02 AM »
As you are compelled to have the last word, go and do, as you can do no other.
I wish to thank you as you have expanded my vocabulary with "apophatic" and I see we are both practitioners of this rhetorical form, especially in the ad hominem derivative; although I trust denial of such is forthcoming.
The word "routine" applied to your perception of transparency "Fool for Christ" is especially wounding. Well done, sir.
As it is tiresome for me at this point, allow a couple of parting clarifications: it was not Plato, it was the the physics notion of trying to tie the general to the particular, but that is a tempest in a teapot now.
As to Comparative Theology and textbooks, I am familiar with such via college classes over 45 years ago, but I see very little here, if any, in this forum of the objective approach that those texts utilized; present company excepted, of course.
As you pointed out, using, in this case, my recent baptismal date as a foil to "know" me in asking such, is that a bit of the kettle-pot-black device? But I am sure you understood your two questions to me vis-a-vis the intention of your query, as I did not.
As to definitions, I always understood -"ology" as in theology to mean "the study of". I see your use of the expanded version is justified by calling down saints and others, presumably theologians.
Ok, so I gather that justification negates (ah, that apophatic device) or alters the dictionary approach to discussion here?  Or is your "knowledge of God" by definition simply exclude all others, like Mormons, since their knowledge of him or the false-ness of him (or is their no false statements in such, especially in light of "living one's theology"?), justify those with "true knowledge of the True God"? If "living one's theology" is "measurable" and if Mormons have "more" stuff, like hospitals, schools, and other visible means of spreading their "life in..." then they have a better theology? Absurd!
Tired, I am and again, we part ways. I thank you for the prayer for intelligence, however as a comedian quipped, and the human condition shows, "Ya' can't fix stupid".
You take it from here on out, Antonious Nicolas. Prayers have been said with your name in them.
=

I can only bow to your clear insight and skills at seeing that I am arrogant, self righteous and conceded in my responses. Also it is vainglorious to please, refute or rebut you. You display fortitude in relentless pursuit of something I am obviously incapable of understanding, despite my best tries.

In other words, you can dish it out but you can't take it.  You see fit to declare me self-righteous, manipulative, judgmental, et cetera - and all from simply delineating the differences between the god of Kolob and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - but when your sword is turned back upon you your only response is condescending sarcasm and a transparent "Fool for Christ" routine.

Again, you are right with the pot-kettle-black thingy, as it is futile for me to try to get over what bothers me about those that will denigrate another's POV or passion about their beliefs.

I don't know if it's futile for you to try to quell your misdirected passions, but it's unfair of you to read something into someone's post that isn't there, utilize them as an object lesson for the benefit detriment of the entire board, whine when they object, half-heartedly acknowledge that they didn't mean what you thought they meant, and then continue to rake them over the coals and condemn them for doing exactly what you just acknowledged they didn't do even as you "apologize".  You can't be a martyr and a persecutor simultaneously.

Though I do not "know" you, a blessing for us both,

Truly and absolutely.

I cannot get across that the human issues common to all, are what continue to separate us in this exchange.

Not true.  You see the critique of a given belief system as a personal judgment of all who subscribe to it.  It is not.

It seems you wish that I "know" each person's particulars regarding their individual circumstances and I declare that I do, not as individuals but as human beings sharing sufferings, joys and even in some pains, etc.

A general acknowledgment of the human condition doesn't give you grounds to declare that no human alive is fit to engage in commentary upon the world's various belief systems.  It simply doesn't follow.

As to Mormons and my reading into the facts you presented, I thought it meant that you considered Mormons going to hell due to their beliefs; plain and simple, but I see I am wrong in my assumption that you thought so, since we both agree that neither of us know what God thinks of each individual Mormon and their going to hell or not.

This is precisely what I was looking for.  Thank you, Len.

This raised my curiosity, obviously out of ignorance, since the Particular and General Theory of Stuff could apply. I cannot see that theory's application so maybe you could and if so, I expect a response.

I'm familiar with Plato's Theory of Forms, which includes the statement that particular forms are subsumed under more general forms, but I must admit that the (capital letters) "Particular and General Theory of Stuff" is beyond the pale for me.  Suffice it to say, I continue to assert that critiquing a belief system is not necessarily a condemnation of those who subscribe to it, most especially of those who do so because it is what they were raised with or all they know.

If I could too find a way to discuss religious doctrine without judgment that would be great but I cannot.

Let's try an exercise then.  Do you believe that the religion of the ancient Greeks was the true faith?  Can you find any fault with it?  If you do find any fault with it, does that necessarily mean that you believe the ancient Greeks are all burning in hell?

It is good you can, and I look forward to it, but probably not in this missive.

I have already done so in this thread.  The facts as it pertains to comparing the God of Orthodoxy with the god of Kolob are, as you say, not in dispute.  It is you who read a meaning into the facts (that the worshippers of the god of Kolob are doomed to perdition) that wasn't there.  So there we have it: religious doctrine has been discussed in this exchange without any judgment upon the faithful of a given creed implied.

To hold forth on Comparative Theology without a POV is a challenge.

And yet it has been done.  Entire textbooks have been written about it.

Declarative statements on such would give a natural rise to asking questions and in so doing would "tease out" positions possibly contrary to such facts, with the bottom line coming to "diving revelation" which does not lend itself to Western scrutiny, which can be considered another POV by me as well as others.

Baptized, March 9, 2014 and already dismissive of Western modes of thinking?  And are there no declarative statements concerning dogma emanating from the ancient East?  Was any and every theological opinion met with an agnostic shrug of the shoulders?

Such issues move easily into  "what is the Nature of God' and other ontological matters but that is for another time.

Thanks to the wonders of apophatic theology, we don't have to pretend that the unknowable nature of God means we might have to leave ourselves open to the possibility that He is actually a man from Kolob who had a beginning, has flesh, and has sex with his many wives.

You ask if we should refrain from discussing comparative theology altogether. Let me ask you, does it provide fruit within the discussion circle?

I would contend that yes, it does.  In fact, it can be a useful teaching tool.

Does it provide light for those in the circle that either do not understand or agree with what is declared?

If they do not understand, they are free to ask for clarification and we are compelled to oblige.  If they don't agree, that is their right, but that doesn't mean that we should remain mute or pretend that "all religions are different paths to God" for fear of giving offense.  That is not an act of love nor is it what Our Lord commissioned us to do.

Are the declarations of fact stated in a neutral, easy manner for discussion or declared in a way that would lend itself to passions?

It seems that the passions of some will be enflamed no matter how the facts are declared.  If there is not any condemnatory slant to their presentation, they will read one into it anyway.

Another quibble, pray it is not idle chatter, but we do not agree on definitions...

Then is it right for you to compare your definition to mine, or are you guilty of judging me by asserting that I am mistaken?

we do not "live our theology"

Lossky, Florovsky, Matta el-Meskeen, St. Seraphim of Sarov, and countless others would disagree.  What is theology?  Knowledge of God.  Knowing God.  Can one know God merely through discursive study?  Merely through books?  Now who's thinking like a Westerner?  Theology bereft of its ontological and pastoral dimension isn't theology at all.  Theology is indeed lived.

we life our faith (or at best attempt to). Do Muslims live their faith or their study of Allah? One does not live their study of God, but reflect their faith in God. IOW theology is not faith (although I wish I not to go into a long diatribe on the difference, I pray the intelligence to understand the diff).

I pray the intelligence to understand that you're creating an unnecessary and very Western false dichotomy.

Bare minimum to be Christian: Deuteronomy 6:20 starts it and Luke 10:27 and Mathew 22:37 finish well enough.

Hmmm...

Quote
In the future, when your son asks you, “What is the meaning of the stipulations, decrees and laws the Lord our God has commanded you?”

So, obey the Old Testament Law?

Quote
He answered, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

Would that be the God of the Old and New Testament, or will any old god do?  Even one who has a beginning, has flesh, and lots and lots of sex?

Quote
they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called 'Rabbi' by others.

Yes, yes they do.  "Hey, look at me!  I'm outraged because someone dared to compare two religious communities' conception of God in an internet discussion forum!  Aren't I a humble, holy, and pious individual unlike this Pharisee over here whose post ignites my passions and boils my very blood?"  

I tip my yarmulke to you, Rabbi.

As it is, I lay down.

We shall see.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #85 on: November 21, 2014, 10:48:52 AM »
I don't understand anything of what you just said.
God bless!

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #86 on: November 21, 2014, 11:24:11 AM »
This thread is still going?

Mostly due to flame wars, male egos, and seeing who can have "the last word" as well as other worn out phrases based on idle chatter.

Don't be so hard on yourself, Len.   :P

"Nothing to see hear, folks, move along".

And yet you can't!   :laugh:

As it is, I lay down.

We shall see.

Still not sleepy yet I guess, Rabbi? Hence, the lengthy diatribe below despite your declarations that you were done with this thread, that it was "idle chatter" kept alive only by "male egos" and the "desire to have the last word".

As you are compelled to have the last word, go and do, as you can do no other.

Are you looking in a mirror as you type this?

I wish to thank you as you have expanded my vocabulary with "apophatic" and I see we are both practitioners of this rhetorical form, especially in the ad hominem derivative; although I trust denial of such is forthcoming.

No need for a denial, Len.  Apophatic theology is applied to God, not to men, so it can't be applied ad hominem.  As example of apophatic theology - saying what God is not - would be something like "God is not a man from the planet Kolob".

The word "routine" applied to your perception of transparency "Fool for Christ" is especially wounding. Well done, sir.

And your characterization of me as "self-righteous", "manipulative", et cetera, was meant to be complimentary?  Don't dish it out, Len...

As it is tiresome for me at this point

So you keep saying, and yet you continue your attempts to rebut at length.

allow a couple of parting clarifications: it was not Plato, it was the the physics notion of trying to tie the general to the particular, but that is a tempest in a teapot now.

We'll see if they're parting.  At any rate, I don't accept your argument that an assessment of a system of belief is necessarily a condemnation of all who subscribe to it, however it's couched.

As to Comparative Theology and textbooks, I am familiar with such via college classes over 45 years ago, but I see very little here, if any, in this forum of the objective approach that those texts utilized;

It's here, Len, provided of course that you don't choose to read meanings into people's words that aren't there in order to "enflame your passions" and flaunt your (self-)righteous indignation before the world.

present company excepted, of course.

Another veiled jab, eh Len?  And then you wonder why things don't grind to a halt after your "apologies" mingled with and followed by repetitions of the initial accusation are issued.

A: You're a jerk.

B: What?

A: I'm sorry, I shouldn't have called you a jerk.

B: Apology accepted.

A: Thanks, jerk.

As you pointed out, using, in this case, my recent baptismal date as a foil to "know" me in asking such

I'm not claiming to "know" you, Len.  I was simply remarking on the fact that you are quite quick to deride certain thought processes - such as declaring what God is not - as being "Western" (with the implication that they are somehow flawed and deficient) when you've only just entered the Eastern Church yourself.  Especially when folks in the East have been making definitive declarations of what God is not since at least the time of "God is not a man that He should lie" which might be extended to "God is not a man that He should live on the planet Kolob and get it on with lots of ladies".

is that a bit of the kettle-pot-black device?

Not at all.

But I am sure you understood your two questions to me vis-a-vis the intention of your query, as I did not.

My questions in that bit of our delightful back-and-forth were:

Quote
And are there no declarative statements concerning dogma emanating from the ancient East?


and

Quote
Was any and every theological opinion met with an agnostic shrug of the shoulders?

In other words, did the Eastern Fathers ever reject anyone's conception of God?

As to definitions, I always understood -"ology" as in theology to mean "the study of". I see your use of the expanded version is justified by calling down saints and others, presumably theologians.

I'm just saying that I'm not the first person to use the term theology in that sense.  In fact, my use of the term in that way is predicated upon the work and statements of the men I cited.

Ok, so I gather that justification negates (ah, that apophatic device) or alters the dictionary approach to discussion here? 

There is sometimes more to a word than its simple definition in a dictionary reveals, Len.

Or is your "knowledge of God" by definition simply exclude all others, like Mormons, since their knowledge of him or the false-ness of him (or is their no false statements in such, especially in light of "living one's theology"?), justify those with "true knowledge of the True God"? If "living one's theology" is "measurable" and if Mormons have "more" stuff, like hospitals, schools, and other visible means of spreading their "life in..." then they have a better theology? Absurd!

Yes, what you've typed here is absurd, Len.  What's more, it is not at all what I was contending.  Nice attempt at a straw man though.

Tired, I am and again, we part ways.

But for how long?  That's the question.

I thank you for the prayer for intelligence, however as a comedian quipped, and the human condition shows, "Ya' can't fix stupid".

I believe they call him Tater Salad.  ;)

You take it from here on out, Antonious Nicolas.

I'll take it as far as I can before your inevitable next rejoinder.

Prayers have been said with your name in them.



Sorry, you can't Steal My Sunshine - Len;)
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,167
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #87 on: November 22, 2014, 06:44:10 PM »
Glenn Beck is crazy, whatever he says or does should be questioned.
I don't think he should be questioned, but should be flatly ignored. He is a privileged adolescent like all Randians, and I wouldn't hold your breath if he ever grows out of puberty.
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,167
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #88 on: November 22, 2014, 06:59:06 PM »
I seen and been reading about Glenn Beck and his new turn of heart and remaking his tv channel. I must say I really love his ideas of uplifting stories his bring Christ back into Christmas his some what pixar history house. It all sounds great.
I can't help wounder if this isn't all a Mormon plot to convert people to their faith. Kinda like a better byu channel. Do you think my gut feeling is wrong on this
Mormonism is pretty kooky, but I wouldn't worry about "a Mormon plot", since its ideology is so laughably silly, as it won't likely have a wide influence on society.

But hey atleast they do a lot of charitable work.
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #89 on: November 22, 2014, 07:07:51 PM »
I seen and been reading about Glenn Beck and his new turn of heart and remaking his tv channel. I must say I really love his ideas of uplifting stories his bring Christ back into Christmas his some what pixar history house. It all sounds great.
I can't help wounder if this isn't all a Mormon plot to convert people to their faith. Kinda like a better byu channel. Do you think my gut feeling is wrong on this
Mormonism is pretty kooky, but I wouldn't worry about "a Mormon plot", since its ideology is so laughably silly, as it won't likely have a wide influence on society.

But hey atleast they do a lot of charitable work.

Some historians, like Rodney Stark, have argued that in the next 100 years Mormonism may well become a major world religion with hundreds of members. Stark is hardly an apologist for Mormonism, either.

In general, having "laughably silly" beliefs doesn't necessarily preclude groups from growing and gaining influence. Because Mormons (along with Jehovah's Witnesses, Adventists, radical Pentecostals, etc.) have their own methods for evangelizing aggressively, they can grow much faster than more "establishment" churches which often refrain from doing so.

The Mormon founders themselves envisioned a future where Mormons take the lead in "saving America". Many think Glenn Beck's entire approach to politics is based on this idea.
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,167
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #90 on: November 22, 2014, 08:42:35 PM »
Some historians, like Rodney Stark, have argued that in the next 100 years Mormonism may well become a major world religion with hundreds of members. Stark is hardly an apologist for Mormonism, either.

In general, having "laughably silly" beliefs doesn't necessarily preclude groups from growing and gaining influence. Because Mormons (along with Jehovah's Witnesses, Adventists, radical Pentecostals, etc.) have their own methods for evangelizing aggressively, they can grow much faster than more "establishment" churches which often refrain from doing so.

The Mormon founders themselves envisioned a future where Mormons take the lead in "saving America". Many think Glenn Beck's entire approach to politics is based on this idea.
Well I wasn't trying to single out only Mormonism, I think its just as weird as any other religion or Christian denomination.

I did get a laugh at a historian predicting the future. Maybe he's right, but I just find it to be very unlikely. And really historians should stick to storytelling, because that's what history is.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2014, 08:43:02 PM by nothing »
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #91 on: November 23, 2014, 10:35:42 AM »
Well, Good Morning, Sunshine!
Like the old joke: What's the definition of a sadist? Some one who is nice to a masochist! So let the flame wars continue!
(actually, if any others are still watching this, pray for them as well, as we are leading them to perdition. We should either get a room or step into a ring)

You know, Antonius, I sleep, I rest and wake up ready to go at it again. A day away does wonders. I recommend it.
Lord, give me strength in my old age to help the unjust, and since many, as here, find themselves to be wounded, give them strength as well.

You play the victim well, Nikolas, as so many in this generation, so please let me give you insight, if you are capable of receiving such.

And yet again, as done so often in this age, you wish to have words suited to your choice rather than common definitions or meanings. Could it be that such erudition leaves one as Don Quixote, living in the tower of the internet, so that all they know is themselves and the spins placed upon their medium of exchange? In your case, Yes, so clear your mind. Forget your 2500 or so posts and deal with a simple one.

Inherent in the base notion of "apophatic" is the ad hominem approach to demonstrate, or actually alter, a point, though the base definition is clear,  yet for some reason you bring  it only into theology, via an Ortho-Wiki definition ::) Oh, wait, now I see another diatribe (and wounded warrior) since I used a non-Orthodox definition of that word IN an Orthodox setting! Lick your wounds as you seek justice for this offense, young man.
Oh, and as for that definition, while away yesterday enjoying a lecture from Fr. John Beher, he too brought up that word, theology. It seems his erudition is derived from all the work he has sweated  and worked for over the years and from what I gather he agrees with you! It is not that he is in error, as you, but rather he started with the base definition and derived his notions. You simply start with such notion and proceed to make invalid and meaningless points! If we cannot agree on such base issues as with the meaning of words, then I concede this discussion, however I urge you to remain not only on the internet but never leave this forum to join another. A
Actually, forgive me again, as you really do need to leave not only this forum, but the internet as it is obvious this is the only place you have meaning, and this is an illusion.

For example: http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/god-and-mankind-comparative-religions.html
is not to close to your definition of Comparative Theology, as I see only the 'Comparative" in the title, but as in all "comparative" academic approaches, judgment is left out of the game.  Now I know you wish to tell me you did not judge in your initial response, but your other posts in this thread belie you.

I know you will not conceded that the above is a poor start of any attempt to educate you, but try and humor me a moment, difficult as it may be for you.
By using your definition of theology and thus your justification, you can call Mormons, and all others, false and "sick" as they too " live our theology". As we can only see how one "lives our theology" their way of "living", producing, and giving examples like hospitals, schools,  a whole state AND running guys for the highest office in the greatest country on Earth, well it must be greater than Orthodoxy, as they do all that "live" stuff so well! So, Rabbi, God loves and favors them more, since they "live theology" and can prove it in this kingdom-moving-toward heaven.
IOW, your definitions, like of "theology" and "apophatic" as well as others used in this exchange,  have meanings in it not given, but applied, and poorly at that.
For the slow amongst us, as can have agreements on words, we can have some type of meaningful exchange; absent that....phaaa!

You applied your "unfair" to my original post on this issue. You claim to seek some notion of "fairness" but only by definitions you wish.  And as your attempts rest in the divine, (really,? a definition from Ortho-Wiki?)  there is no justice for your victim-hood here on Earth, which further justifies your castigation and vitriol of those that use YOU, the high and mighty (not simply your post to make a point; how dare we pipsqueaks with only months of Orthodoxy) and so your practice of victim-hood is as poorly worn as most young folks wear clothes now-a-days.

Thanks for the insight I got into my own rotten soul per our exchange, as well as the pop video. I've not listen to bubble gum in scores of years.

This thread is still going?

Mostly due to flame wars, male egos, and seeing who can have "the last word" as well as other worn out phrases based on idle chatter.

Don't be so hard on yourself, Len.   :P

"Nothing to see hear, folks, move along".

And yet you can't!   :laugh:

As it is, I lay down.

We shall see.

Still not sleepy yet I guess, Rabbi? Hence, the lengthy diatribe below despite your declarations that you were done with this thread, that it was "idle chatter" kept alive only by "male egos" and the "desire to have the last word".

As you are compelled to have the last word, go and do, as you can do no other.

Are you looking in a mirror as you type this?

I wish to thank you as you have expanded my vocabulary with "apophatic" and I see we are both practitioners of this rhetorical form, especially in the ad hominem derivative; although I trust denial of such is forthcoming.

No need for a denial, Len.  Apophatic theology is applied to God, not to men, so it can't be applied ad hominem.  As example of apophatic theology - saying what God is not - would be something like "God is not a man from the planet Kolob".

The word "routine" applied to your perception of transparency "Fool for Christ" is especially wounding. Well done, sir.

And your characterization of me as "self-righteous", "manipulative", et cetera, was meant to be complimentary?  Don't dish it out, Len...

As it is tiresome for me at this point

So you keep saying, and yet you continue your attempts to rebut at length.

allow a couple of parting clarifications: it was not Plato, it was the the physics notion of trying to tie the general to the particular, but that is a tempest in a teapot now.

We'll see if they're parting.  At any rate, I don't accept your argument that an assessment of a system of belief is necessarily a condemnation of all who subscribe to it, however it's couched.

As to Comparative Theology and textbooks, I am familiar with such via college classes over 45 years ago, but I see very little here, if any, in this forum of the objective approach that those texts utilized;

It's here, Len, provided of course that you don't choose to read meanings into people's words that aren't there in order to "enflame your passions" and flaunt your (self-)righteous indignation before the world.

present company excepted, of course.

Another veiled jab, eh Len?  And then you wonder why things don't grind to a halt after your "apologies" mingled with and followed by repetitions of the initial accusation are issued.

A: You're a jerk.

B: What?

A: I'm sorry, I shouldn't have called you a jerk.

B: Apology accepted.

A: Thanks, jerk.

As you pointed out, using, in this case, my recent baptismal date as a foil to "know" me in asking such

I'm not claiming to "know" you, Len.  I was simply remarking on the fact that you are quite quick to deride certain thought processes - such as declaring what God is not - as being "Western" (with the implication that they are somehow flawed and deficient) when you've only just entered the Eastern Church yourself.  Especially when folks in the East have been making definitive declarations of what God is not since at least the time of "God is not a man that He should lie" which might be extended to "God is not a man that He should live on the planet Kolob and get it on with lots of ladies".

is that a bit of the kettle-pot-black device?

Not at all.

But I am sure you understood your two questions to me vis-a-vis the intention of your query, as I did not.

My questions in that bit of our delightful back-and-forth were:

Quote
And are there no declarative statements concerning dogma emanating from the ancient East?


and

Quote
Was any and every theological opinion met with an agnostic shrug of the shoulders?

In other words, did the Eastern Fathers ever reject anyone's conception of God?

As to definitions, I always understood -"ology" as in theology to mean "the study of". I see your use of the expanded version is justified by calling down saints and others, presumably theologians.

I'm just saying that I'm not the first person to use the term theology in that sense.  In fact, my use of the term in that way is predicated upon the work and statements of the men I cited.

Ok, so I gather that justification negates (ah, that apophatic device) or alters the dictionary approach to discussion here? 

There is sometimes more to a word than its simple definition in a dictionary reveals, Len.

Or is your "knowledge of God" by definition simply exclude all others, like Mormons, since their knowledge of him or the false-ness of him (or is their no false statements in such, especially in light of "living one's theology"?), justify those with "true knowledge of the True God"? If "living one's theology" is "measurable" and if Mormons have "more" stuff, like hospitals, schools, and other visible means of spreading their "life in..." then they have a better theology? Absurd!

Yes, what you've typed here is absurd, Len.  What's more, it is not at all what I was contending.  Nice attempt at a straw man though.

Tired, I am and again, we part ways.

But for how long?  That's the question.

I thank you for the prayer for intelligence, however as a comedian quipped, and the human condition shows, "Ya' can't fix stupid".

I believe they call him Tater Salad.  ;)

You take it from here on out, Antonious Nicolas.

I'll take it as far as I can before your inevitable next rejoinder.

Prayers have been said with your name in them.



Sorry, you can't Steal My Sunshine - Len;)
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #92 on: November 23, 2014, 01:41:14 PM »
I judge the quality of forum posts based on the ability to say the most with the fewest words.

You failed.
God bless!

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #93 on: November 23, 2014, 03:18:26 PM »
I knew it, Len.  I knew you wouldn't be able to follow your own advice and "let it go".  :)

Well, Good Morning, Sunshine!

The Earth says, "Hello!"

Like the old joke: What's the definition of a sadist? Some one who is nice to a masochist!

I guess that'd make me the Marquis de Sade then, because you're definitely the one taking a beating here.

So let the flame wars continue!

Flame on, Rabbi.

(actually, if any others are still watching this, pray for them as well, as we are leading them to perdition. We should either get a room or step into a ring)

I have no interest in getting a room with you, Len, but anytime you wanna step into a ring...

You know, Antonius, I sleep, I rest and wake up ready to go at it again. A day away does wonders. I recommend it.

In other words, you see you're losing the debate so you declare the thread to be idle chatter and announce you're done with it, but your pride has been wounded, the fact that you cannot get the last word continues to sting, and so your unjustifiably inflated ego drags you back to the battlefield to take another drubbing.

Lord, give me strength in my old age to help the unjust, and since many, as here, find themselves to be wounded, give them strength as well.

 ::) You are truly a myrmidon of melodrama, Len.

You play the victim well, Nikolas

Not as well as you play the faux-Fool for Christ and wannabe prophet of the interwebs.

Besides, I'm not playing the victim, Len.  Just reminding you not to start stuff you can't finish.  You picked the wrong post to try to make an example of and now you continue to humiliate yourself because your compulsive nature won't allow you to stop replying after every rambling argument you've advanced has been thoroughly refuted.  Sort of like how Trisagion ate your lunch in the other thread but you can't stop prattling on there either.

as so many in this generation

Which generation would that be, Len?

so please let me give you insight, if you are capable of receiving such.

I'm waiting.  You've given me none as yet.

And yet again, as done so often in this age, you wish to have words suited to your choice rather than common definitions or meanings.

Or it could just be that I've read some books you haven't that use the term in a way you're not familiar with.  Or it could be that despite the fact that you're so dismissive of "Western" modes of thought that you haven't actually acquainted yourself with the sort of Eastern Christian perspective informing my use of the term in question.

Could it be that such erudition leaves one as Don Quixote, living in the tower of the internet, so that all they know is themselves and the spins placed upon their medium of exchange?

Could it be that you're out of your depth and that your original premise has no merit and has been debunked, and yet your ego won't allow you to refrain from making yet another garbled, longwinded, and ultimately meaningless reply and so here we are yet again?

In your case, Yes, so clear your mind.

But then we'd both be empty-headed.

Forget your 2500 or so posts

At this rate, you'll catch up to me soon enough.

and deal with a simple one.

I'm dealing with a "simple one" every time I engage with you.

Inherent in the base notion of "apophatic" is the ad hominem approach to demonstrate, or actually alter, a point, though the base definition is clear,  yet for some reason you bring  it only into theology

Because that's the context in which we're using the term and the only way in which it's applicable to the discussion, your attempts to muddy the waters aside.

via an Ortho-Wiki definition

Yes, Len, Orthodox Wiki, because when I referenced the theologians who utilized the terminology in question the way I did, you had no clue who they were.  Therefore, something more elementary was in order.

Oh, wait, now I see another diatribe (and wounded warrior)

You must have a lot of mirrors in your house.

since I used a non-Orthodox definition of that word IN an Orthodox setting!

In an attempt at obfustication, since you're losing the argument big time.

Lick your wounds as you seek justice for this offense, young man.

Wounds?  Len, other than your attempts at personal insults, you've managed no "wounds" whatsoever.  You haven't been able to either defend your own position or discredit any aspect of mine in any meaningful way, so now you're throwing a fit like a child.  You're the walking exemplar of the maxim that age doesn't necessarily come with wisdom.

Oh, and as for that definition, while away yesterday enjoying a lecture from Fr. John Beher, he too brought up that word, theology. It seems his erudition is derived from all the work he has sweated  and worked for over the years and from what I gather he agrees with you! It is not that he is in error, as you, but rather he started with the base definition and derived his notions. You simply start with such notion and proceed to make invalid and meaningless points!

He agrees with me and yet I'm in error and he's not?  Because I'm trouncing you in this debate?  No, I started from the same place as Fr. John using the same source material.  I'm very familiar with his perspective on the subject and I know that our positions are virtually identical.  My point just went over your head because a lot of this is still new to you, and yet, despite your advanced years, your desire to appear wise in the eyes of a bunch of strangers on the internet won't allow you to acknowledge this and so you cast about for peripheral definitions to the terms in question to justify your unjustifiable position.  It's the same thing you're doing in the other thread in which Trisagion is eating your lunch, the thread in which you're contending that we have to pretend to be agnostic about the errors of Roman Catholicism even as you're contending we have to be agnostic about the errors of Mormonism here.  In both instances, you've taken up untenable positions and yet your arrogance won't allow you to simply acknowledge that you're wrong and out of your depth, so you continue to throw up rambling smokescreens in order to obscure the issue.

If we cannot agree on such base issues as with the meaning of words, then I concede this discussion

And yet you'll predictably manage another rambling, ineffectual reply.

however I urge you to remain not only on the internet but never leave this forum to join another. A
Actually, forgive me again, as you really do need to leave not only this forum, but the internet as it is obvious this is the only place you have meaning, and this is an illusion.

Yeah, this is a favorite ad hominem argument of those getting their butts kicked in webforum debates.  "Well, you may be pwning me here (look it up, if that's also beyond the scope of your experience due to generational disconnect) but you don't have a life outside the internet."  Whatever.  Think that if you like, Len.  You don't know who I am or what I do outside of this forum.  All you know is I'm the guy you haven't been able to best in this discussion.  Based on the enormous amount of venom and vitriol dripping from every one of your posts, it obviously means a lot to you too.  Your "passions are enflamed" and you're taking this very personally.  You've declared you were going to "let it go" and you've advised others to "move along, nothing to see here" but you can't and you won't.  You'll even reply to this, and more caustically than ever.  You keep referencing your age and the number of years you have on me.  Chronologically, perhaps, but you're not what I'd call a wise old man, someone I could learn from.  Rather, you stoop lower than folks a quarter of your age on these boards.  At least they have an excuse for their immaturity.  Maybe you should grow up, Len, and stop taking debates on a webforum so seriously.

For example: http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/god-and-mankind-comparative-religions.html
is not to close to your definition of Comparative Theology, as I see only the 'Comparative" in the title, but as in all "comparative" academic approaches, judgment is left out of the game.
 

Actually, Len, I've read that book.  Ogden compares and contrasts as I did.  So far as judgment goes, he - like me - doesn't assign anyone to hell.  He has to be politically correct in academia though, so he can't make any definitive statements like, say, there is only one True God and He is not Odin, Thor, Zeus, or the god of Kolob.

Now I know you wish to tell me you did not judge in your initial response, but your other posts in this thread belie you.

I made simple statements of fact, Len.  You yourself acknowledged that you read judgment into them that wasn't there, so your words belie you on this score.  Your wounded ego and an immaturity uncharacteristic of someone so long in the tooth won't allow you to let it drop though.

I know you will not conceded that the above is a poor start of any attempt to educate you, but try and humor me a moment, difficult as it may be for you.

Len, you'd better obtain the rudiments of an education for yourself before you attempt to educate anyone else.

By using your definition of theology and thus your justification, you can call Mormons, and all others, false and "sick" as they too " live our theology". As we can only see how one "lives our theology" their way of "living", producing, and giving examples like hospitals, schools,  a whole state AND running guys for the highest office in the greatest country on Earth, well it must be greater than Orthodoxy, as they do all that "live" stuff so well! So, Rabbi, God loves and favors them more, since they "live theology" and can prove it in this kingdom-moving-toward heaven.

And again, you totally misapprehend all I've been saying.  I'm not an adherent of the Prosperity Gospel ethos, Len.  I don't believe that any of what you've cited above is proof of God's favor or of the truth of a given system.  This isn't what I mean at all by living our theology.  Go back and re-read the post, and while you're at it, watch your Fr. John Behr lecture again and look into the theologians I've cited.  St. Seraphim lived his theology and he certainly didn't have a mansion and a yacht out in the woods or aspire to the highest office in the land.  All of that means nothing, Rabbi.  Nothing at all.

IOW, your definitions, like of "theology" and "apophatic" as well as others used in this exchange,  have meanings in it not given, but applied, and poorly at that.
For the slow amongst us, as can have agreements on words, we can have some type of meaningful exchange; absent that....phaaa!

In other words, you're struggling to keep up.  You had to look the terms up in the first place and were familiar with only there most pedestrian definitions (and I'm not talking about foot traffic here, in case you're confused again).  Then, when your own research confirms that the terms can be applied in the way I apply them, your ego still won't allow you to acknowledge that you are absolutely the one getting an education here.  The only lesson you're teaching me is that there is no fool like an old fool.

You applied your "unfair" to my original post on this issue. You claim to seek some notion of "fairness" but only by definitions you wish.  And as your attempts rest in the divine, (really,? a definition from Ortho-Wiki?)  there is no justice for your victim-hood here on Earth, which further justifies your castigation and vitriol of those that use YOU, the high and mighty (not simply your post to make a point; how dare we pipsqueaks with only months of Orthodoxy) and so your practice of victim-hood is as poorly worn as most young folks wear clothes now-a-days.

You were wrong.  Period.  You read meaning into my words that wasn't there, and what is more you attempted to do so in a grandiose, pompous way which makes it appear as if you consider yourself something of a web prophet and a guru to be respected.  You then proceeded to prove that you were neither at all, but rather a petty, vitriolic individual who - even after acknowledging that he was wrong - was possessed of such an unjustifiably enormous ego that he could not bow out of the discussion but continued to flail about in an ever more desperate, incoherent, self-righteous and venomous manner, down to the present post.  I'm sure the next one will be even more haughty, crass, and cretinous.

Thanks for the insight I got into my own rotten soul per our exchange,

What good does acknowledging this do while continuing to indulge in the same behavior by persisting in this unprofitable discussion?

as well as the pop video. I've not listen to bubble gum in scores of years.

Glad you enjoyed it.  It was as eloquent and sophisticated as your entire contribution to this discussion.

You're incoherent babbling aside, you're attempts at muddying the waters won't earn you any points here.  The main thrust of your argument has been defeated: we don't have to pretend that Mormons might be Christians or that they might be worshipping the true God.  They aren't and they don't.  That doesn't mean we're condemning them to hell either.  You had that all wrong, as you've already admitted, but you can't let that stand.  You have to get the last word.  So all you've got left is your wannabe web prophet and fake Fool for Christ schtick, so you're laying it on thick, along with a healthy dose of incoherent babble fit for a bottle of Dr. Bronner's soap.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2014, 03:35:57 PM by Antonious Nikolas »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #94 on: November 23, 2014, 11:51:21 PM »
I judge the quality of forum posts based on the ability to say the most with the fewest words.

You failed.

Antonious is very helpful with his line-by-line responses.  It's much appreciated.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #95 on: November 23, 2014, 11:58:03 PM »
I knew it, Len.  I knew you wouldn't be able to follow your own advice and "let it go".  :)

I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #96 on: November 24, 2014, 12:00:27 AM »
I knew it, Len.  I knew you wouldn't be able to follow your own advice and "let it go".  :)


I am entranced by this gif.
God bless!

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,329
  • Milo Thatch is the ONLY Milo for me. #FreeAtlantis
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #97 on: November 24, 2014, 12:02:43 AM »
As we can only see how one "lives our theology" their way of "living", producing, and giving examples like hospitals, schools,  a whole state AND running guys for the highest office in the greatest country on Earth, well it must be greater than Orthodoxy, as they do all that "live" stuff so well! So, Rabbi, God loves and favors them more, since they "live theology" and can prove it in this kingdom-moving-toward heaven.

I've heard apologists for Calvinism (such as Dr. Vishal Mangalwadi) use examples like that to argue in favor of Calvinism being the truth. "Calvinist countries are richest, therefore God favors them the most, which must mean it's the true faith".

Calvinism is growing in many third-world countries, particularly in places like Indonesia, China and Mangalwadi's native India. I suspect one of the reasons for the appeal is a sort of theological cargo cult mentality; at least, some news articles I've read have implied this. They want to be like Americans and have all the stuff Americans have, they see Calvinism as the faith that "made America", so they become Calvinists. It may not be the "name it and claim it" Pentecostal version of prosperity gospel, nor is it liberation theology, but it has a lot of features in common with both.
« Last Edit: November 24, 2014, 12:03:40 AM by Minnesotan »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,188
  • Unbreakable! He's alive, dammit! It's a MIRACLE!
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Candle-lighting Cross Kisser
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #98 on: November 24, 2014, 12:13:36 AM »
I knew it, Len.  I knew you wouldn't be able to follow your own advice and "let it go".  :)


I am entranced by this gif.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #99 on: November 24, 2014, 10:05:48 AM »
I think Len and Maria should get married.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #100 on: November 24, 2014, 10:08:01 AM »
I judge the quality of forum posts based on the ability to say the most with the fewest words.

You failed.

Antonious is very helpful with his line-by-line responses.  It's much appreciated.

Thanks, hecma925.  Tris was addressing this post to Len though, just like when he said:

I don't understand anything of what you just said.

We have a theme going here.  :)

As we can only see how one "lives our theology" their way of "living", producing, and giving examples like hospitals, schools,  a whole state AND running guys for the highest office in the greatest country on Earth, well it must be greater than Orthodoxy, as they do all that "live" stuff so well! So, Rabbi, God loves and favors them more, since they "live theology" and can prove it in this kingdom-moving-toward heaven.

I've heard apologists for Calvinism (such as Dr. Vishal Mangalwadi) use examples like that to argue in favor of Calvinism being the truth. "Calvinist countries are richest, therefore God favors them the most, which must mean it's the true faith".

Calvinism is growing in many third-world countries, particularly in places like Indonesia, China and Mangalwadi's native India. I suspect one of the reasons for the appeal is a sort of theological cargo cult mentality; at least, some news articles I've read have implied this. They want to be like Americans and have all the stuff Americans have, they see Calvinism as the faith that "made America", so they become Calvinists. It may not be the "name it and claim it" Pentecostal version of prosperity gospel, nor is it liberation theology, but it has a lot of features in common with both.

You're right on the money, Minnesotan, and I'm sure you realize that this isn't what an Orthodox Christian means at all when he speaks of "living his theology".  We're not looking for material prosperity as "proof" to validate our belief system.  The notion that the ability of a given sect to build things or aspire to positions of power means that they somehow have "God's favor" is ridiculous.  How many evil empires and false prophets have achieved great temporal power and tremendous material wealth?

I hope you'd also agree that the notion of separating theology from faith (as in the statement, "we do not 'live our theology' Do Muslims live their faith or their study of Allah? One does not live their study of God, but reflect their faith in God. IOW theology is not faith") is fallacious and creates a false and unnecessary dichotomy alien to Orthodoxy which asserts that:

Quote
Theology, mysticism, spirituality, moral rules, worship, art: these things must not be kept in separate compartments. Doctrine cannot be understood unless it is prayed: a theologian, said Evagrius, is one who knows how to pray, and he who prays in spirit and in truth is by that very act a theologian (On Prayer, 60 (P. G. 79, 1180B)). - Bishop Kallistos Ware

Or to quote St. Evagrius directly:

Quote
If you are a theologian you truly pray.  If you truly pray you are a theologian.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #101 on: November 26, 2014, 09:09:38 AM »
As we can only see how one "lives our theology" their way of "living", producing, and giving examples like hospitals, schools,  a whole state AND running guys for the highest office in the greatest country on Earth, well it must be greater than Orthodoxy, as they do all that "live" stuff so well! So, Rabbi, God loves and favors them more, since they "live theology" and can prove it in this kingdom-moving-toward heaven.

I've heard apologists for Calvinism (such as Dr. Vishal Mangalwadi) use examples like that to argue in favor of Calvinism being the truth. "Calvinist countries are richest, therefore God favors them the most, which must mean it's the true faith".

Calvinism is growing in many third-world countries, particularly in places like Indonesia, China and Mangalwadi's native India. I suspect one of the reasons for the appeal is a sort of theological cargo cult mentality; at least, some news articles I've read have implied this. They want to be like Americans and have all the stuff Americans have, they see Calvinism as the faith that "made America", so they become Calvinists. It may not be the "name it and claim it" Pentecostal version of prosperity gospel, nor is it liberation theology, but it has a lot of features in common with both.

Friend of mine (gasp) has one of those MDivs from St. Vlads, did a study on Calvinism and tells me it is the "perfect" religion if we were bees or ants and had no free will. Seems they "sum it up" to the point of "perfection" and one is damned or saved no matter what. That could be appealing to some, besides didn't Calvin have some thing to do with prostitution and its sanctions? Or is that internet chatter?
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #102 on: November 26, 2014, 11:15:31 AM »
Antonius, took a couple of days to do that "live" thingy, but again, after a short refreshing time, we can get back at it. As I vainly attempt to cut the verbosity, since quantity is appreciated over quality, we shall fly over the non-salient points to see if one can stop staring at the shadows and come into the light, painful as you find it.
Yes, it is pride that brings us back to have at it, but at least it is not foolish as these exchanges can bring more light than heat, I pray.

You are right,  I do have a passion for melodrama, but then as an old guy, I've read more than Hemingway and find passion in expression.
I was not aware that another (Trisagion) "ate my lunch" in some other thread; if you can point to such, it would be interesting. I am barely getting this internet-forum-thingy down. I took me far to long how to intersperse the "quote" thingy between sections, thus I find this a whole lot less tedious and time consuming simply to answer your jabs in this fashion.
Actually, to help, it would be simpler to cut to the essentials of each post rather than jab here and there, no? I see you are good at it and if I live long enough maybe after 2500 posts I can learn to do it quickly, or if I am that interested. Like another posted in this thread, the more words, the more boring! As such, I'll bet you are a pill, as in "for sleep".

As for "picking the wrong post", I guess my faith is not that strong either. Seems to me we "were meant to be" here and now in this missive, no?
If anything is true, real and correct, yours was the perfect post, but then again, I do not want to accept it either! Ah, kismet!

The "faux for Christ" I fear maybe correct and daily prayers are said for such, but I see, in the eyes of others, it is simply pride. Not caring what others think is really a function of youth most likely. Old guys rule simply because we don't give a rip anymore.

My friend, in old world terms, one of your more salient points, after all the above butt sniffing, is "Or it could just be that I've read some books you haven't that use the term in a way you're not familiar with.  Or it could be that despite the fact that you're so dismissive of "Western" modes of thought that you haven't actually acquainted yourself with the sort of Eastern Christian perspective informing my use of the term in question."
One could never have more doubt, or less logic, than the above. Everyone has read some books more than others have not read; and it can follow that you have read more than I regarding this, or any particular topic, but you remind me of Phaedo, or was it another of his works? that teaching people to read is a waste of time, as they fancy themselves "intelligent" yet know nothing. It has been far to long to recall, but such it seems to be all to often now-a-days.
Again, if you wish to be so parochial in your terms, definitions and derivations, this is America and you are free to do so, however your audience will simply be in the cave sharing your shadows and not in the bright freedom where grounded definitions launch meaningful exchanges.

Oh, now I have a reference point:
Quote
"He agrees with me and yet I'm in error and he's not?  Because I'm trouncing you in this debate?  No, I started from the same place as Fr. John using the same source material.  I'm very familiar with his perspective on the subject and I know that our positions are virtually identical.  My point just went over your head because a lot of this is still new to you, and yet, despite your advanced years, your desire to appear wise in the eyes of a bunch of strangers on the internet won't allow you to acknowledge this and so you cast about for peripheral definitions to the terms in question to justify your unjustifiable position.  It's the same thing you're doing in the other thread in which Trisagion is eating your lunch, the thread in which you're contending that we have to pretend to be agnostic about the errors of Roman Catholicism even as you're contending we have to be agnostic about the errors of Mormonism here.  In both instances, you've taken up untenable positions and yet your arrogance won't allow you to simply acknowledge that you're wrong and out of your depth, so you continue to throw up rambling smokescreens in order to obscure the issue."

Please, disregard the previous and issue on Trisagion and "lunch my eating" due to this reference point. You do ignore well my other points so this should be right in line.
As to being in agreement with Fr. John Beher, that is simply mimicry, as stated, he worked at arriving and gave proof of his work, whereas you simply jumped on that band wagon; see my reference to Plato's work above and reading.

My original, in the thread, was not to "appear wise" as I don't care how I "appear" but rather that those who negate or jeer and tear down the beliefs of others rather than tout what is good that is in their beliefs, is wrong/bad. Seems you don't get that point, but rather continue to tear down and jeer if and when crossed, there is a hell of an unfulfilled payment.  Ah, humans! Fr. John was right, we only know of One and with Him His creation of man was finally finished. Clearly, we only strive to be human.

As to the other thread, you are right, I do not know the Catholic Church or any other church in its completeness. Nor do I know the fine points of differentiation between the religions nor the healing words that will bring them back together, or is that possible in the universe of either church? I can tell you one thing for sure I do know...the Muslims are coming...and we can either find a way or they will have their way with us...but that is another thread however the moderator does not allow politics. As an aside I am losing the thread of my own post here and may start another thread on a difference between RC and Ortho...regarding the prepositions "of" and "from"...and I expect you to be more perspicacious in that thread than here.

Regarding my "agnostic" on such I gather you know Orthodoxy in all her fullness?  If so, your 2500 threads I need to review I suppose but if they are as boring as this, then I will not reach perfection under your tutelage.
And you judge me as being an agnostic in not discerning and determining issues that scholars have pondered, then you and and another have "eaten my lunch" and bereft of such I look forward to the posts of you and others, but again, feasting on nothing will give me just as much: nothing.

Thanks for the new word PWING. As in the most of this exchange you use words that have meaning that back up your stuff and only a select few understand. Small world, eh?
And you may be right, I am not wise, however age has given me experience, obviously not from just playing computer, and reflections on those experiences will give one insight; which is why we have a name for those who've not lived long and/or are incapable of insight and in case you are wondering, "immature" is the word.

I cannot go back to Fr. Beher for review as his lecture was live, but he did sign my book. Yippee! and we did have a to small but pleasant exchange regarding Charles Taylor's book A Secular Age. Gads, keep it a secret, but Fr. Beher knows and reads liberal Catholic theology books! Holly smokes! Shhhhh. I wish I could have showed him San Francisco, my hometown, but he was to leave to soon to return to his family. Enough bragging;
I am sure you do not beieve the tripe I posted about "prosperity gospel" but it is all to facile when your definitions, like "living our theology" come into the exchange. Maybe, obviously or stubbornly, you don't see it, but I am done kicking that donkey down the street. As in all arguments, the base of agreement on definitions and then context of those words (syntax) are what hinder any meaningful exchange. Go ahead, use your words and meanings but don't venture out into the real world as there is slaughter out here. 

As we end this exchange....naw, there is not more than I can give....well, maybe...but this day is getting on and I wish to join it.
The end of your scree seems to dwindle to naught but to the ad hominem so I guess you too have run out of gas? You are right, I am an old fool as such would only continue this silliness...that, and a young fool too...and if so, then do it for Christ's sake rather than only of the ad hominem, as that is what can be learned in such an exchange: anger, pride, hatred all of which is turned to the good since we now know our sins to confess....kind of simple, like many of my confessions: Fr. I drive and in that I find most all those seven deadly sins....something so  simple as driving or "webbing" and yet so sinful! no?

PS: your tag line is interesting and believable, I find.
 
In other words, you see you're losing the debate so you declare the thread to be idle chatter and announce you're done with it, but your pride has been wounded, the fact that you cannot get the last word continues to sting, and so your unjustifiably inflated ego drags you back to the battlefield to take another drubbing.

Lord, give me strength in my old age to help the unjust, and since many, as here, find themselves to be wounded, give them strength as well.

 ::) You are truly a myrmidon of melodrama, Len.

You play the victim well, Nikolas

Not as well as you play the faux-Fool for Christ and wannabe prophet of the interwebs.

Besides, I'm not playing the victim, Len.  Just reminding you not to start stuff you can't finish.  You picked the wrong post to try to make an example of and now you continue to humiliate yourself because your compulsive nature won't allow you to stop replying after every rambling argument you've advanced has been thoroughly refuted.  Sort of like how Trisagion ate your lunch in the other thread but you can't stop prattling on there either.

as so many in this generation

Which generation would that be, Len?

so please let me give you insight, if you are capable of receiving such.

I'm waiting.  You've given me none as yet.

And yet again, as done so often in this age, you wish to have words suited to your choice rather than common definitions or meanings.

Or it could just be that I've read some books you haven't that use the term in a way you're not familiar with.  Or it could be that despite the fact that you're so dismissive of "Western" modes of thought that you haven't actually acquainted yourself with the sort of Eastern Christian perspective informing my use of the term in question.

Could it be that such erudition leaves one as Don Quixote, living in the tower of the internet, so that all they know is themselves and the spins placed upon their medium of exchange?

Could it be that you're out of your depth and that your original premise has no merit and has been debunked, and yet your ego won't allow you to refrain from making yet another garbled, longwinded, and ultimately meaningless reply and so here we are yet again?

In your case, Yes, so clear your mind.

But then we'd both be empty-headed.

Forget your 2500 or so posts

At this rate, you'll catch up to me soon enough.

and deal with a simple one.

I'm dealing with a "simple one" every time I engage with you.

Inherent in the base notion of "apophatic" is the ad hominem approach to demonstrate, or actually alter, a point, though the base definition is clear,  yet for some reason you bring  it only into theology

Because that's the context in which we're using the term and the only way in which it's applicable to the discussion, your attempts to muddy the waters aside.

via an Ortho-Wiki definition

Yes, Len, Orthodox Wiki, because when I referenced the theologians who utilized the terminology in question the way I did, you had no clue who they were.  Therefore, something more elementary was in order.

Oh, wait, now I see another diatribe (and wounded warrior)

You must have a lot of mirrors in your house.

since I used a non-Orthodox definition of that word IN an Orthodox setting!

In an attempt at obfustication, since you're losing the argument big time.

Lick your wounds as you seek justice for this offense, young man.

Wounds?  Len, other than your attempts at personal insults, you've managed no "wounds" whatsoever.  You haven't been able to either defend your own position or discredit any aspect of mine in any meaningful way, so now you're throwing a fit like a child.  You're the walking exemplar of the maxim that age doesn't necessarily come with wisdom.

Oh, and as for that definition, while away yesterday enjoying a lecture from Fr. John Beher, he too brought up that word, theology. It seems his erudition is derived from all the work he has sweated  and worked for over the years and from what I gather he agrees with you! It is not that he is in error, as you, but rather he started with the base definition and derived his notions. You simply start with such notion and proceed to make invalid and meaningless points!

He agrees with me and yet I'm in error and he's not?  Because I'm trouncing you in this debate?  No, I started from the same place as Fr. John using the same source material.  I'm very familiar with his perspective on the subject and I know that our positions are virtually identical.  My point just went over your head because a lot of this is still new to you, and yet, despite your advanced years, your desire to appear wise in the eyes of a bunch of strangers on the internet won't allow you to acknowledge this and so you cast about for peripheral definitions to the terms in question to justify your unjustifiable position.  It's the same thing you're doing in the other thread in which Trisagion is eating your lunch, the thread in which you're contending that we have to pretend to be agnostic about the errors of Roman Catholicism even as you're contending we have to be agnostic about the errors of Mormonism here.  In both instances, you've taken up untenable positions and yet your arrogance won't allow you to simply acknowledge that you're wrong and out of your depth, so you continue to throw up rambling smokescreens in order to obscure the issue.

If we cannot agree on such base issues as with the meaning of words, then I concede this discussion

And yet you'll predictably manage another rambling, ineffectual reply.

however I urge you to remain not only on the internet but never leave this forum to join another. A
Actually, forgive me again, as you really do need to leave not only this forum, but the internet as it is obvious this is the only place you have meaning, and this is an illusion.

Yeah, this is a favorite ad hominem argument of those getting their butts kicked in webforum debates.  "Well, you may be pwning me here (look it up, if that's also beyond the scope of your experience due to generational disconnect) but you don't have a life outside the internet."  Whatever.  Think that if you like, Len.  You don't know who I am or what I do outside of this forum.  All you know is I'm the guy you haven't been able to best in this discussion.  Based on the enormous amount of venom and vitriol dripping from every one of your posts, it obviously means a lot to you too.  Your "passions are enflamed" and you're taking this very personally.  You've declared you were going to "let it go" and you've advised others to "move along, nothing to see here" but you can't and you won't.  You'll even reply to this, and more caustically than ever.  You keep referencing your age and the number of years you have on me.  Chronologically, perhaps, but you're not what I'd call a wise old man, someone I could learn from.  Rather, you stoop lower than folks a quarter of your age on these boards.  At least they have an excuse for their immaturity.  Maybe you should grow up, Len, and stop taking debates on a webforum so seriously.

For example: http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/god-and-mankind-comparative-religions.html
is not to close to your definition of Comparative Theology, as I see only the 'Comparative" in the title, but as in all "comparative" academic approaches, judgment is left out of the game.
 

Actually, Len, I've read that book.  Ogden compares and contrasts as I did.  So far as judgment goes, he - like me - doesn't assign anyone to hell.  He has to be politically correct in academia though, so he can't make any definitive statements like, say, there is only one True God and He is not Odin, Thor, Zeus, or the god of Kolob.

Now I know you wish to tell me you did not judge in your initial response, but your other posts in this thread belie you.

I made simple statements of fact, Len.  You yourself acknowledged that you read judgment into them that wasn't there, so your words belie you on this score.  Your wounded ego and an immaturity uncharacteristic of someone so long in the tooth won't allow you to let it drop though.

I know you will not conceded that the above is a poor start of any attempt to educate you, but try and humor me a moment, difficult as it may be for you.

Len, you'd better obtain the rudiments of an education for yourself before you attempt to educate anyone else.

By using your definition of theology and thus your justification, you can call Mormons, and all others, false and "sick" as they too " live our theology". As we can only see how one "lives our theology" their way of "living", producing, and giving examples like hospitals, schools,  a whole state AND running guys for the highest office in the greatest country on Earth, well it must be greater than Orthodoxy, as they do all that "live" stuff so well! So, Rabbi, God loves and favors them more, since they "live theology" and can prove it in this kingdom-moving-toward heaven.

And again, you totally misapprehend all I've been saying.  I'm not an adherent of the Prosperity Gospel ethos, Len.  I don't believe that any of what you've cited above is proof of God's favor or of the truth of a given system.  This isn't what I mean at all by living our theology.  Go back and re-read the post, and while you're at it, watch your Fr. John Behr lecture again and look into the theologians I've cited.  St. Seraphim lived his theology and he certainly didn't have a mansion and a yacht out in the woods or aspire to the highest office in the land.  All of that means nothing, Rabbi.  Nothing at all.

IOW, your definitions, like of "theology" and "apophatic" as well as others used in this exchange,  have meanings in it not given, but applied, and poorly at that.
For the slow amongst us, as can have agreements on words, we can have some type of meaningful exchange; absent that....phaaa!

In other words, you're struggling to keep up.  You had to look the terms up in the first place and were familiar with only there most pedestrian definitions (and I'm not talking about foot traffic here, in case you're confused again).  Then, when your own research confirms that the terms can be applied in the way I apply them, your ego still won't allow you to acknowledge that you are absolutely the one getting an education here.  The only lesson you're teaching me is that there is no fool like an old fool.

You applied your "unfair" to my original post on this issue. You claim to seek some notion of "fairness" but only by definitions you wish.  And as your attempts rest in the divine, (really,? a definition from Ortho-Wiki?)  there is no justice for your victim-hood here on Earth, which further justifies your castigation and vitriol of those that use YOU, the high and mighty (not simply your post to make a point; how dare we pipsqueaks with only months of Orthodoxy) and so your practice of victim-hood is as poorly worn as most young folks wear clothes now-a-days.

You were wrong.  Period.  You read meaning into my words that wasn't there, and what is more you attempted to do so in a grandiose, pompous way which makes it appear as if you consider yourself something of a web prophet and a guru to be respected.  You then proceeded to prove that you were neither at all, but rather a petty, vitriolic individual who - even after acknowledging that he was wrong - was possessed of such an unjustifiably enormous ego that he could not bow out of the discussion but continued to flail about in an ever more desperate, incoherent, self-righteous and venomous manner, down to the present post.  I'm sure the next one will be even more haughty, crass, and cretinous.

Thanks for the insight I got into my own rotten soul per our exchange,

What good does acknowledging this do while continuing to indulge in the same behavior by persisting in this unprofitable discussion?

as well as the pop video. I've not listen to bubble gum in scores of years.

Glad you enjoyed it.  It was as eloquent and sophisticated as your entire contribution to this discussion.

You're incoherent babbling aside, you're attempts at muddying the waters won't earn you any points here.  The main thrust of your argument has been defeated: we don't have to pretend that Mormons might be Christians or that they might be worshipping the true God.  They aren't and they don't.  That doesn't mean we're condemning them to hell either.  You had that all wrong, as you've already admitted, but you can't let that stand.  You have to get the last word.  So all you've got left is your wannabe web prophet and fake Fool for Christ schtick, so you're laying it on thick, along with a healthy dose of incoherent babble fit for a bottle of Dr. Bronner's soap.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #103 on: November 26, 2014, 11:21:45 AM »
What lunch did I eat?  I don't recall eating anyone's lunch. I hope it tasted good. I hate it when I eat food and can't remember it. I'm having a roast beef sandwich today. Please no one get mad that I'm booching this fast.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2014, 11:23:20 AM by TheTrisagion »
God bless!

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #104 on: November 26, 2014, 01:30:00 PM »
Len!  Here you come again, lurching forward like an over-the-hill prizefighter to take another drubbing.  And every bit as articulate.  This should be fun, as always.  Hope you've got your glasses handy.  ;D

Friend of mine (gasp) has one of those MDivs from St. Vlads, did a study on Calvinism and tells me it is the "perfect" religion if we were bees or ants and had no free will. Seems they "sum it up" to the point of "perfection" and one is damned or saved no matter what. That could be appealing to some, besides didn't Calvin have some thing to do with prostitution and its sanctions? Or is that internet chatter?

Uh oh, Len.  Sounds like your friend might be judging the Calvinists.  For shame.  Who is he to say that their religion is fit only for insects?  Idle chatter, Len!  Idle chatter!

Antonius, took a couple of days to do that "live" thingy, but again, after a short refreshing time, we can get back at it.

Con gusto!

As I vainly attempt to cut the verbosity

Vainly is right!

since quantity is appreciated over quality

You appreciate quantity over quality, Len?  Well, that explains a lot!

we shall fly over the non-salient points

Now, now, Len.  If I flew over the non-salient points, there'd be nothing left of our voluminous, rambling posts to address.

to see if one can stop staring at the shadows and come into the light, painful as you find it.

It's a good thing then that your posts - like their author - are dimly - if at all - illuminated.  ;)

Yes, it is pride that brings us back to have at it, but at least it is not foolish as these exchanges can bring more light than heat, I pray.

Have they thus far?  I don't think so.  They began with you assigning a position to me I never advanced and then degenerated to a petty and unedifying back-and-forth from there.  All we've ascertained so far is that you're incapable of acknowledging that you're wrong after the substance of your argument has been thoroughly and undeniably refuted.

You are right,  I do have a passion for melodrama, but then as an old guy, I've read more than Hemingway and find passion in expression.

You certainly don't emulate his preferred mode of expression: lean, simple prose!  ;D

I was not aware that another (Trisagion) "ate my lunch" in some other thread; if you can point to such, it would be interesting.

You know what I'm talking about, Len.  The thread in which you made the same kinds of untenable arguments concerning remaining agnostic about Catholic theology as you've made here concerning Mormon theology and Tris questioned:

Are you really equating your attempt to pretend Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism are the same thing with the Resurrection or the Holy Eucharist?  :o

Both sides make exclusive claims that cannot be reconciled with each other. Both sides at least agree to that. By sitting in the middle, plugging your ears and saying that everyone is right, you are just going to look foolish to everyone.

To which you made no substantive reply, but retorted with more of your usual schtick.

I am barely getting this internet-forum-thingy down. I took me far to long how to intersperse the "quote" thingy between sections, thus I find this a whole lot less tedious and time consuming simply to answer your jabs in this fashion.
Actually, to help, it would be simpler to cut to the essentials of each post rather than jab here and there, no? I see you are good at it and if I live long enough maybe after 2500 posts I can learn to do it quickly, or if I am that interested. Like another posted in this thread, the more words, the more boring! As such, I'll bet you are a pill, as in "for sleep".

I'm obviously keeping your attention, Len.  You can't seem to take your eyes off of anything I write.  If my posts are a sleeping pill to you, they must also engage you even in your dreams as you seem incapable of turning away from them even after a few days of recuperative "living".

As to my preferred style, others seem to find it helpful as it lends itself to greater clarity, where as your rambling style befits the garbled, meandering stream-of-consciousness to which you usually treat us.  But hey, styles make fights.

As for "picking the wrong post", I guess my faith is not that strong either. Seems to me we "were meant to be" here and now in this missive, no?
If anything is true, real and correct, yours was the perfect post, but then again, I do not want to accept it either! Ah, kismet!

Kismet?  You old sweet-talker you!  And I thought you were kidding about getting a room.

The "faux for Christ" I fear maybe correct and daily prayers are said for such, but I see, in the eyes of others, it is simply pride. Not caring what others think is really a function of youth most likely. Old guys rule simply because we don't give a rip anymore.

So...then the inability to let the subject drop stems from what on your part then?

My friend, in old world terms, one of your more salient points, after all the above butt sniffing

You keep your nose where I can see it, Len.

is "Or it could just be that I've read some books you haven't that use the term in a way you're not familiar with.  Or it could be that despite the fact that you're so dismissive of "Western" modes of thought that you haven't actually acquainted yourself with the sort of Eastern Christian perspective informing my use of the term in question."
One could never have more doubt, or less logic, than the above. Everyone has read some books more than others have not read; and it can follow that you have read more than I regarding this, or any particular topic,

And see, Len, here's where you come of like a know-it-all-who-knows-nothing blowhard.  I applied terminology relevant to the discussion in a certain way.  You - being unfamiliar with the terminology - questioned the application.  It was proven that the application was not only appropriate, but the preferred application by most Orthodox theologians.  Instead of simply acknowledging that you were in over your head on this particular point, you attempted another pompous rejoinder in which you attempted to scold me for not limiting myself to the pedestrian definitions you found via Google. I wasn't having it, so I replied with the above.  This has been our entire conversation in a nutshell.  You make a meandering, insupportable point, I refute it, you reply with more rambling and some pretentious role-playing in which you fancy yourself a guru bent on teaching me.  All you teach me, as I've said, is that the old aren't necessarily wise or erudite.

but you remind me of Phaedo, or was it another of his works? that teaching people to read is a waste of time, as they fancy themselves "intelligent" yet know nothing. It has been far to long to recall, but such it seems to be all to often now-a-days.

Len, your haughtiness is showing.  Just because I haven't learned anything from you in this exchange, this doesn't mean that I'm not open to learning period.  You just haven't shown me anything of value as yet.

Again, if you wish to be so parochial in your terms, definitions and derivations, this is America and you are free to do so, however your audience will simply be in the cave sharing your shadows and not in the bright freedom where grounded definitions launch meaningful exchanges.

You have that backwards, Len.  If the audience isn't stubborn and so attached to their own delusions that they're unwilling to relinquish them even when they've been proven false, then perhaps they could move beyond the shadows (that is, the pedestrian meanings they've fixated upon and insist upon applying to certain terms) and see them in the light for what they really are.

Oh, now I have a reference point...Please, disregard the previous and issue on Trisagion and "lunch my eating" due to this reference point.

LOL.  All this shows is that despite your protestations that you reply to posts en toto instead of line-by-line, you actually do the latter.  Otherwise, once you came to this line, you wouldn't have needed to ask the question you asked above about Trisagion ganking you for your ham and cheese.

You do ignore well my other points so this should be right in line.

On the contrary, Len!  I've addressed and refuted each of them.

As to being in agreement with Fr. John Beher, that is simply mimicry, as stated, he worked at arriving and gave proof of his work, whereas you simply jumped on that band wagon

And you're wrong again, as I formulated my beliefs on the subject before I read anything Fr. John Behr published on the subject.  We were simply both working from the same source material.

see my reference to Plato's work above and reading.

You're the one apprehending only the shadows here, Len.

My original, in the thread, was not to "appear wise" as I don't care how I "appear"

Your posting history and style indicates otherwise.

but rather that those who negate or jeer and tear down the beliefs of others rather than tout what is good that is in their beliefs, is wrong/bad.

And again, you yourself acknowledged that you read judgments into my post that weren't there, but you didn't like that I didn't allow your mischaracterization to stand and so here we are.  You're obviously used to pretending to be the wisest guy in the room and having people defer to your pomposity - hence your constant appeals to your age and your name-dropping of literary figures - but since its obviously all a show I see no reason to allow you an unchallenged pulpit here.

Seems you don't get that point, but rather continue to tear down and jeer if and when crossed, there is a hell of an unfulfilled payment.

Again, Len, you may as well be looking in a mirror.  All you've posted in this exchange falls under the heading of this reprimand.
 
Ah, humans! Fr. John was right, we only know of One and with Him His creation of man was finally finished. Clearly, we only strive to be human.

Yes, he was right indeed, Len.

As to the other thread, you are right, I do not know the Catholic Church or any other church in its completeness. Nor do I know the fine points of differentiation between the religions nor the healing words that will bring them back together, or is that possible in the universe of either church?

True reconciliation is only possible when we acknowledge what actually separates us.  Pretending that no one's right, no one's wrong won't lead to anything but a false unity.  This is the problem, Len.  You insist that acknowledging difference - that saying someone is wrong - amounts to a condemnation of who they are.

I can tell you one thing for sure I do know...the Muslims are coming...and we can either find a way or they will have their way with us...but that is another thread however the moderator does not allow politics.

So everyone might be right but the Muslims?  The Hugh Hefner of Kolob might be our God, and the Catholics and the Orthodox might both be right when they articulate doctrines that are diametrically opposed, but the Muslims...oh no...they're beyond the pale.  Who are we to say they're wrong when it comes to their conception of God?

As an aside I am losing the thread of my own post here

Always.



and may start another thread on a difference between RC and Ortho...regarding the prepositions "of" and "from"...and I expect you to be more perspicacious in that thread than here.

You calling for me to be more perspicacious is like Rasputin calling for Yul Brynner to shave.

Regarding my "agnostic" on such I gather you know Orthodoxy in all her fullness? 

Yes, Len.  It follows that if someone understands the differences between the Orthodox and Catholic conceptions of the procession of the Holy Spirit, the Immaculate Conception, the role of the Papacy, et cetera, they must be claiming to know Orthodoxy in all of its fullness.  Same thing if they contend that the man from Kolob is not the Christian God.  ::)

If so, your 2500 threads I need to review I suppose but if they are as boring as this, then I will not reach perfection under your tutelage.

So boring you can't stay away, huh, Len?  :D

You keep making a bid deal out of the fact that I've got 2300+ posts under my belt (almost 2400) which you exaggerate to 2500, but that's cool.  I've been here a lot longer than you.  I average 0.546 per day.  You average 0.236 per day.  Like I said, you'll catch me soon enough!  ;)

And you judge me as being an agnostic in not discerning and determining issues that scholars have pondered, then you and and another have "eaten my lunch" and bereft of such I look forward to the posts of you and others, but again, feasting on nothing will give me just as much: nothing.

If we've been eating your lunch, Len, feasting on nothing is precisely what we've been doing.  You've contributed nothing to this discussion but the same pettiness, spitefulness, and venom you accuse others of while simultaneously feigning humility and pretending to be above it all.

Thanks for the new word PWING. As in the most of this exchange you use words that have meaning that back up your stuff and only a select few understand. Small world, eh?

Only a small clique of elitist sophisticates know what pwning means?  Welcome to the internet, Len.  :)

And you may be right, I am not wise, however age has given me experience, obviously not from just playing computer, and reflections on those experiences will give one insight; which is why we have a name for those who've not lived long and/or are incapable of insight and in case you are wondering, "immature" is the word.

And what's your excuse for the immaturity you've put on public display throughout this thread despite your advanced age and supposed "insight"?  You've stooped as low in this thread as any of the young adults or teenagers posting in this forum.  If it's due to lack of "experience" for the rest of us, what's you're excuse?

I cannot go back to Fr. Beher for review as his lecture was live, but he did sign my book. Yippee!

Great!  Now try reading it.

and we did have a to small but pleasant exchange regarding Charles Taylor's book A Secular Age. Gads, keep it a secret, but Fr. Beher knows and reads liberal Catholic theology books! Holly smokes! Shhhhh.

Right, and that must mean he agrees with everything in it.  Guess what, Len?  I've read the book of Mormon!!!  :o

I wish I could have showed him San Francisco, my hometown, but he was to leave to soon to return to his family.

I'm glad he was able to make his escape.

Enough bragging;
I am sure you do not beieve the tripe I posted about "prosperity gospel" but it is all to facile when your definitions, like "living our theology" come into the exchange.

You still don't know what "living our theology" means.

Maybe, obviously or stubbornly, you don't see it, but I am done kicking that donkey down the street.

Turn now to the mule in the mirror and see if you can budge him.

As in all arguments, the base of agreement on definitions and then context of those words (syntax) are what hinder any meaningful exchange.

So we should reduce ourselves to the most pedestrian and constraining definitions possible even if they have less to do with the subject matter at hand or the terms as they were originally introduced to the discussion and are applied in Orthodox discourse.

Go ahead, use your words and meanings but don't venture out into the real world as there is slaughter out here. 

Don't you venture into the real world, as you might discover that you're not the guru you think you are and your pretentions might be seen for exactly what they are.

As we end this exchange....

LOL.

naw, there is not more than I can give....

And I'm sure we'll here it enough soon.

well, maybe...but this day is getting on and I wish to join it.

You'll be back.

The end of your scree seems to dwindle to naught but to the ad hominem so I guess you too have run out of gas?

Either that or since the main thrust of your argument has been repeatedly debunked and discredited - and you've made no significant dents in anything I've advanced - there's nothing left to do but reply to your childish ad hominem in kind.  Besides, it's fun.

You are right, I am an old fool as such would only continue this silliness...that, and a young fool too...and if so, then do it for Christ's sake rather than only of the ad hominem, as that is what can be learned in such an exchange: anger, pride, hatred all of which is turned to the good since we now know our sins to confess....kind of simple, like many of my confessions: Fr. I drive and in that I find most all those seven deadly sins....something so  simple as driving or "webbing" and yet so sinful! no?

If you think your participation in this thread is something sinful - something you need to confess - why return again and again to that which tempts you and "enflames your passions"?  Such might be ascribed to youthful braggadocio and immaturity in a young fool.  If an old fool has really not advanced beyond that stage after his many years of experience, garnering much insight, what excuse does he have at all?

PS: your tag line is interesting and believable, I find.

Yes, it is true Len.  Though I would clarify that despite your baseless assertions to the contrary a critical assessment of fallacious doctrine does not amount to judging the sins of those who've authored it or subscribe to it.  But it seems you refuse to get it.
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #105 on: November 27, 2014, 10:12:36 AM »
From the below I found out that you read a book, you win, you win, you win per your own descriptions and proclamations, you agree that all my posts are pompous, idiotic, rambling, foolish, voluminous, etc,  you track and respond to them well, have fun retorting to such, you admire Hemingway although more than a few writers critique him as merely a typist, not artist, you go to other threads to search out my other posts (thank you for the compliment, though you mischaracterized me with that as well!),  you show no idea what the word "kismet" means and thus miss the point that this exchange was fated by someone other than the serendipity and the moderator, you find "pedestrian" (used as a pejorative by you) to start with agreed upon definitions and develop them, you place yourself among theologians (God help us and them since standing in the garage does not make you an automobile), you enjoy being elite since you use the interweb and PWING and that is all fun and dandy,

however,
Quote
It follows that if someone understands the differences between the Orthodox and Catholic conceptions of the procession of the Holy Spirit, the Immaculate Conception, the role of the Papacy, et cetera, they must be claiming to know Orthodoxy in all of its fullness.  Same thing if they contend that the man from Kolob is not the Christian God.

 you ***ad hominem removed***!  You read a book or a thousand "on" Orthodoxy and "know" her fullness!? You understand what you typed? You take mysteries and miracles and the separation of great churches and then claim to understand them?
Post what you will; we are done and if we had a room or a ring you would be pounded into ***ad hominem and veiled obscenity removed***!

edited by minasoliman



Len!  Here you come again, lurching forward like an over-the-hill prizefighter to take another drubbing.  And every bit as articulate.  This should be fun, as always.  Hope you've got your glasses handy.  ;D

Friend of mine (gasp) has one of those MDivs from St. Vlads, did a study on Calvinism and tells me it is the "perfect" religion if we were bees or ants and had no free will. Seems they "sum it up" to the point of "perfection" and one is damned or saved no matter what. That could be appealing to some, besides didn't Calvin have some thing to do with prostitution and its sanctions? Or is that internet chatter?

Uh oh, Len.  Sounds like your friend might be judging the Calvinists.  For shame.  Who is he to say that their religion is fit only for insects?  Idle chatter, Len!  Idle chatter!

Antonius, took a couple of days to do that "live" thingy, but again, after a short refreshing time, we can get back at it.

Con gusto!

As I vainly attempt to cut the verbosity

Vainly is right!

since quantity is appreciated over quality

You appreciate quantity over quality, Len?  Well, that explains a lot!

we shall fly over the non-salient points

Now, now, Len.  If I flew over the non-salient points, there'd be nothing left of our voluminous, rambling posts to address.

to see if one can stop staring at the shadows and come into the light, painful as you find it.

It's a good thing then that your posts - like their author - are dimly - if at all - illuminated.  ;)

Yes, it is pride that brings us back to have at it, but at least it is not foolish as these exchanges can bring more light than heat, I pray.

Have they thus far?  I don't think so.  They began with you assigning a position to me I never advanced and then degenerated to a petty and unedifying back-and-forth from there.  All we've ascertained so far is that you're incapable of acknowledging that you're wrong after the substance of your argument has been thoroughly and undeniably refuted.

You are right,  I do have a passion for melodrama, but then as an old guy, I've read more than Hemingway and find passion in expression.

You certainly don't emulate his preferred mode of expression: lean, simple prose!  ;D

I was not aware that another (Trisagion) "ate my lunch" in some other thread; if you can point to such, it would be interesting.

You know what I'm talking about, Len.  The thread in which you made the same kinds of untenable arguments concerning remaining agnostic about Catholic theology as you've made here concerning Mormon theology and Tris questioned:

Are you really equating your attempt to pretend Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism are the same thing with the Resurrection or the Holy Eucharist?  :o

Both sides make exclusive claims that cannot be reconciled with each other. Both sides at least agree to that. By sitting in the middle, plugging your ears and saying that everyone is right, you are just going to look foolish to everyone.

To which you made no substantive reply, but retorted with more of your usual schtick.

I am barely getting this internet-forum-thingy down. I took me far to long how to intersperse the "quote" thingy between sections, thus I find this a whole lot less tedious and time consuming simply to answer your jabs in this fashion.
Actually, to help, it would be simpler to cut to the essentials of each post rather than jab here and there, no? I see you are good at it and if I live long enough maybe after 2500 posts I can learn to do it quickly, or if I am that interested. Like another posted in this thread, the more words, the more boring! As such, I'll bet you are a pill, as in "for sleep".

I'm obviously keeping your attention, Len.  You can't seem to take your eyes off of anything I write.  If my posts are a sleeping pill to you, they must also engage you even in your dreams as you seem incapable of turning away from them even after a few days of recuperative "living".

As to my preferred style, others seem to find it helpful as it lends itself to greater clarity, where as your rambling style befits the garbled, meandering stream-of-consciousness to which you usually treat us.  But hey, styles make fights.

As for "picking the wrong post", I guess my faith is not that strong either. Seems to me we "were meant to be" here and now in this missive, no?
If anything is true, real and correct, yours was the perfect post, but then again, I do not want to accept it either! Ah, kismet!

Kismet?  You old sweet-talker you!  And I thought you were kidding about getting a room.

The "faux for Christ" I fear maybe correct and daily prayers are said for such, but I see, in the eyes of others, it is simply pride. Not caring what others think is really a function of youth most likely. Old guys rule simply because we don't give a rip anymore.

So...then the inability to let the subject drop stems from what on your part then?

My friend, in old world terms, one of your more salient points, after all the above butt sniffing

You keep your nose where I can see it, Len.

is "Or it could just be that I've read some books you haven't that use the term in a way you're not familiar with.  Or it could be that despite the fact that you're so dismissive of "Western" modes of thought that you haven't actually acquainted yourself with the sort of Eastern Christian perspective informing my use of the term in question."
One could never have more doubt, or less logic, than the above. Everyone has read some books more than others have not read; and it can follow that you have read more than I regarding this, or any particular topic,

And see, Len, here's where you come of like a know-it-all-who-knows-nothing blowhard.  I applied terminology relevant to the discussion in a certain way.  You - being unfamiliar with the terminology - questioned the application.  It was proven that the application was not only appropriate, but the preferred application by most Orthodox theologians.  Instead of simply acknowledging that you were in over your head on this particular point, you attempted another pompous rejoinder in which you attempted to scold me for not limiting myself to the pedestrian definitions you found via Google. I wasn't having it, so I replied with the above.  This has been our entire conversation in a nutshell.  You make a meandering, insupportable point, I refute it, you reply with more rambling and some pretentious role-playing in which you fancy yourself a guru bent on teaching me.  All you teach me, as I've said, is that the old aren't necessarily wise or erudite.

but you remind me of Phaedo, or was it another of his works? that teaching people to read is a waste of time, as they fancy themselves "intelligent" yet know nothing. It has been far to long to recall, but such it seems to be all to often now-a-days.

Len, your haughtiness is showing.  Just because I haven't learned anything from you in this exchange, this doesn't mean that I'm not open to learning period.  You just haven't shown me anything of value as yet.

Again, if you wish to be so parochial in your terms, definitions and derivations, this is America and you are free to do so, however your audience will simply be in the cave sharing your shadows and not in the bright freedom where grounded definitions launch meaningful exchanges.

You have that backwards, Len.  If the audience isn't stubborn and so attached to their own delusions that they're unwilling to relinquish them even when they've been proven false, then perhaps they could move beyond the shadows (that is, the pedestrian meanings they've fixated upon and insist upon applying to certain terms) and see them in the light for what they really are.

Oh, now I have a reference point...Please, disregard the previous and issue on Trisagion and "lunch my eating" due to this reference point.

LOL.  All this shows is that despite your protestations that you reply to posts en toto instead of line-by-line, you actually do the latter.  Otherwise, once you came to this line, you wouldn't have needed to ask the question you asked above about Trisagion ganking you for your ham and cheese.

You do ignore well my other points so this should be right in line.

On the contrary, Len!  I've addressed and refuted each of them.

As to being in agreement with Fr. John Beher, that is simply mimicry, as stated, he worked at arriving and gave proof of his work, whereas you simply jumped on that band wagon

And you're wrong again, as I formulated my beliefs on the subject before I read anything Fr. John Behr published on the subject.  We were simply both working from the same source material.

see my reference to Plato's work above and reading.

You're the one apprehending only the shadows here, Len.

My original, in the thread, was not to "appear wise" as I don't care how I "appear"

Your posting history and style indicates otherwise.

but rather that those who negate or jeer and tear down the beliefs of others rather than tout what is good that is in their beliefs, is wrong/bad.

And again, you yourself acknowledged that you read judgments into my post that weren't there, but you didn't like that I didn't allow your mischaracterization to stand and so here we are.  You're obviously used to pretending to be the wisest guy in the room and having people defer to your pomposity - hence your constant appeals to your age and your name-dropping of literary figures - but since its obviously all a show I see no reason to allow you an unchallenged pulpit here.

Seems you don't get that point, but rather continue to tear down and jeer if and when crossed, there is a hell of an unfulfilled payment.

Again, Len, you may as well be looking in a mirror.  All you've posted in this exchange falls under the heading of this reprimand.
  
Ah, humans! Fr. John was right, we only know of One and with Him His creation of man was finally finished. Clearly, we only strive to be human.

Yes, he was right indeed, Len.

As to the other thread, you are right, I do not know the Catholic Church or any other church in its completeness. Nor do I know the fine points of differentiation between the religions nor the healing words that will bring them back together, or is that possible in the universe of either church?

True reconciliation is only possible when we acknowledge what actually separates us.  Pretending that no one's right, no one's wrong won't lead to anything but a false unity.  This is the problem, Len.  You insist that acknowledging difference - that saying someone is wrong - amounts to a condemnation of who they are.

I can tell you one thing for sure I do know...the Muslims are coming...and we can either find a way or they will have their way with us...but that is another thread however the moderator does not allow politics.

So everyone might be right but the Muslims?  The Hugh Hefner of Kolob might be our God, and the Catholics and the Orthodox might both be right when they articulate doctrines that are diametrically opposed, but the Muslims...oh no...they're beyond the pale.  Who are we to say they're wrong when it comes to their conception of God?

As an aside I am losing the thread of my own post here

Always.



and may start another thread on a difference between RC and Ortho...regarding the prepositions "of" and "from"...and I expect you to be more perspicacious in that thread than here.

You calling for me to be more perspicacious is like Rasputin calling for Yul Brynner to shave.

Regarding my "agnostic" on such I gather you know Orthodoxy in all her fullness?  

Yes, Len.  It follows that if someone understands the differences between the Orthodox and Catholic conceptions of the procession of the Holy Spirit, the Immaculate Conception, the role of the Papacy, et cetera, they must be claiming to know Orthodoxy in all of its fullness.  Same thing if they contend that the man from Kolob is not the Christian God.  ::)

If so, your 2500 threads I need to review I suppose but if they are as boring as this, then I will not reach perfection under your tutelage.

So boring you can't stay away, huh, Len?  :D

You keep making a bid deal out of the fact that I've got 2300+ posts under my belt (almost 2400) which you exaggerate to 2500, but that's cool.  I've been here a lot longer than you.  I average 0.546 per day.  You average 0.236 per day.  Like I said, you'll catch me soon enough!  ;)

And you judge me as being an agnostic in not discerning and determining issues that scholars have pondered, then you and and another have "eaten my lunch" and bereft of such I look forward to the posts of you and others, but again, feasting on nothing will give me just as much: nothing.

If we've been eating your lunch, Len, feasting on nothing is precisely what we've been doing.  You've contributed nothing to this discussion but the same pettiness, spitefulness, and venom you accuse others of while simultaneously feigning humility and pretending to be above it all.

Thanks for the new word PWING. As in the most of this exchange you use words that have meaning that back up your stuff and only a select few understand. Small world, eh?

Only a small clique of elitist sophisticates know what pwning means?  Welcome to the internet, Len.  :)

And you may be right, I am not wise, however age has given me experience, obviously not from just playing computer, and reflections on those experiences will give one insight; which is why we have a name for those who've not lived long and/or are incapable of insight and in case you are wondering, "immature" is the word.

And what's your excuse for the immaturity you've put on public display throughout this thread despite your advanced age and supposed "insight"?  You've stooped as low in this thread as any of the young adults or teenagers posting in this forum.  If it's due to lack of "experience" for the rest of us, what's you're excuse?

I cannot go back to Fr. Beher for review as his lecture was live, but he did sign my book. Yippee!

Great!  Now try reading it.

and we did have a to small but pleasant exchange regarding Charles Taylor's book A Secular Age. Gads, keep it a secret, but Fr. Beher knows and reads liberal Catholic theology books! Holly smokes! Shhhhh.

Right, and that must mean he agrees with everything in it.  Guess what, Len?  I've read the book of Mormon!!!  :o

I wish I could have showed him San Francisco, my hometown, but he was to leave to soon to return to his family.

I'm glad he was able to make his escape.

Enough bragging;
I am sure you do not beieve the tripe I posted about "prosperity gospel" but it is all to facile when your definitions, like "living our theology" come into the exchange.

You still don't know what "living our theology" means.

Maybe, obviously or stubbornly, you don't see it, but I am done kicking that donkey down the street.

Turn now to the mule in the mirror and see if you can budge him.

As in all arguments, the base of agreement on definitions and then context of those words (syntax) are what hinder any meaningful exchange.

So we should reduce ourselves to the most pedestrian and constraining definitions possible even if they have less to do with the subject matter at hand or the terms as they were originally introduced to the discussion and are applied in Orthodox discourse.

Go ahead, use your words and meanings but don't venture out into the real world as there is slaughter out here.  

Don't you venture into the real world, as you might discover that you're not the guru you think you are and your pretentions might be seen for exactly what they are.

As we end this exchange....

LOL.

naw, there is not more than I can give....

And I'm sure we'll here it enough soon.

well, maybe...but this day is getting on and I wish to join it.

You'll be back.

The end of your scree seems to dwindle to naught but to the ad hominem so I guess you too have run out of gas?

Either that or since the main thrust of your argument has been repeatedly debunked and discredited - and you've made no significant dents in anything I've advanced - there's nothing left to do but reply to your childish ad hominem in kind.  Besides, it's fun.

You are right, I am an old fool as such would only continue this silliness...that, and a young fool too...and if so, then do it for Christ's sake rather than only of the ad hominem, as that is what can be learned in such an exchange: anger, pride, hatred all of which is turned to the good since we now know our sins to confess....kind of simple, like many of my confessions: Fr. I drive and in that I find most all those seven deadly sins....something so  simple as driving or "webbing" and yet so sinful! no?

If you think your participation in this thread is something sinful - something you need to confess - why return again and again to that which tempts you and "enflames your passions"?  Such might be ascribed to youthful braggadocio and immaturity in a young fool.  If an old fool has really not advanced beyond that stage after his many years of experience, garnering much insight, what excuse does he have at all?

PS: your tag line is interesting and believable, I find.

Yes, it is true Len.  Though I would clarify that despite your baseless assertions to the contrary a critical assessment of fallacious doctrine does not amount to judging the sins of those who've authored it or subscribe to it.  But it seems you refuse to get it.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 01:02:30 AM by minasoliman »
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,236
  • Saint Nicholas the Wonderworker, Bishop of Myra
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Oriental Orthodox Church
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #106 on: November 27, 2014, 10:43:41 AM »
Len, you can't have it both ways.  You can't be a transcendent starets teaching an impudent young pupil through his living example of humility and a foul-mouthed internet tough guy making threats of physical violence.

From the below I found out that you read a book

But which book?  You're missing the point.  You implied that because Fr. John Behr read a liberal Catholic book that must mean he was in sympathy with its teachings.  I remarked that I read the book of Mormon and yet we're having this discussion.  Get it?

you win, you win, you win

Coming around to reality, eh?  ;)

per your own descriptions and proclamations, you agree that all my posts are pompous, idiotic, rambling, foolish, voluminous, etc,

Yes.  Yes, indeed.  

you track and respond to them well, have fun retorting to such,

Okay.

you admire Hemingway

Relative to what you're posting.

although more than a few writers critique him as merely a typist, not artist

Who cares?

you go to other threads to search out my other posts

No.  I was following that thread before you lumbered into it.

(thank you for the compliment, though you mischaracterized me with that as well!)

As you've mischaracterized me throughout our exchange.  

you show no idea what the word "kismet" means and thus miss the point that this exchange was fated by someone other than the serendipity and the moderator,

LOL.  We all know what kismet means, Len.  But the way you were using it in that particular post...well, it speaks for itself you charmer.

Quote
Seems to me we "were meant to be" here and now in this missive, no?
If anything is true, real and correct, yours was the perfect post, but then again, I do not want to accept it either! Ah, kismet!

you find "pedestrian" (used as a pejorative by you) to start with agreed upon definitions and develop them

No, I find it arrogant that a self-proclaimed old and experienced man comes across unfamiliar terminology in an online discussion, gets flustered, Googles the terms to find out what they mean, and then tries to claim that the terms are being used improperly based upon the very basic stuff he finds via Google.  The use of the terms was established in this discussion by their first application, that is, the way I used them.  You were just out of your depth.

you place yourself among theologians

Who says?  I just cited them.

(God help us and them since standing in the garage does not make you an automobile)

And blathering on in a pretentious manner doesn't make you a font of wisdom.  Especially when you start cursing at people and threatening them.

you enjoy being elite since you use the interweb and PWING and that is all fun and dandy

Using the internet makes you elite now?  Who knew?

you ***ad hominem removed***!  

Temper, temper, Len.  Since you're resorting to ad hominem should we assume you're out of gas?  ;D

You read a book or a thousand "on" Orthodoxy and "know" her fullness!?

Do you understand sarcasm?

You understand what you typed?

Do you?

You take mysteries and miracles and the separation of great churches and then claim to understand them?

You're getting your panties in a wad for no reason here, Len.  Give it a minute.  It'll dawn on you.  Read the block of text that's got you so worked up again.  See if it means what you think it means.

Post what you will; we are done

Again, I doubt.  You'll be back.

and if we had a room or a ring you would be pounded into ***ad hominem removed***

You're a real tough guy, huh Len?  And very mature.

***ad hominem and veiled obscenity removed***

edited by minasoliman

Language, Len!  Language!  Hardly befitting for a self-appointed starets.

Bottom line, Len: this discussion - if it ever had any merit - is becoming truly less than edifying or beneficial to anyone involved.  Your ire was piqued because you read a judgment of Mormon souls into my proclamation that the Mormon god is not our God that wasn't there.  You wanted to teach the boards a lesson about humility and judging others and you've wound up by cursing at me and threatening me.  Do you think you've got your lesson across to those reading?

Edit: I'll tell you what, Len.  Since my refusal to accept your correction has obviously upset you, I sincerely ask your prayers and forgiveness.  I think you went about this in the wrong way, but I was also less than humble, as we're called to be.  Pray for me, and let's both move on.  Deal?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 01:05:10 AM by minasoliman »
I'm with the camp of 13 million Americans that believe politicians are, or are controlled by, Reptilians. I think only monks can solve this problem. It doesn't seem right that they prefer to ignore it.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #107 on: November 27, 2014, 02:15:37 PM »
locked for review
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 19,999
  • Pray for me Sts. Mina & Kyrillos for my interviews
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #108 on: November 28, 2014, 01:09:17 AM »
I edited out the ad hominem and the veiled obscenity.  Since this is the first offense and since I received an apology, I will let this one go with a friendly warning.  I hope that the apology may be extended to one another, and that we may move on in a healthy discussion of the subject at hand.  Please also remember to be acquainted with the rules.

God bless and Happy Thanksgiving.

Mina

thread unlocked
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #109 on: November 28, 2014, 01:46:12 PM »
I apologize for disrespecting those that read my final post in this thread. I used not only name calling, poor judgement, loss of temper and offensive language, but violated common decency as well as forum etiquette and rules. Erasmus once penned, "Tolerence, if not love, sometimes may be the best we can offer". I failed that and will endeavor to put that back into practice.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Alpha60

  • The Confederate Flag Is Diabolical and Blasphemous
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,553
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: could this be a mormon plot
« Reply #110 on: August 17, 2017, 10:49:43 AM »
This is an interesting thread that I think we should revisit.  I don't believe we can call Mormons Christians, because their religion is not monotheistic, and relates to Christianity in much the same way as Mannichaenism or Islam, albeit slightly more Christo-centric.

Frankly, I think one could argue that some Gnostic heretics or Unitarians are more deserving of the title Christian than Mormons, but as a general rule, I am not even comfortable with that.

The sine qua non for the use of Christianity as a label, as the starting point for ecumenical reconciliation, must be the Nicene Creed.

Fr. Andrew S. Damick has argued the term is of little value, but I disagree.  I think Orthodoxy can have meaningful dialogues with anyone who accepts the Creed (even with the filioque), whereas those who reject it generally resort to polemics to attack us.

Many Protestant pastors and theologians call contemporary non-Nicene sects like Mormons cults, and I think this is reasonable.  The Mormons, JWs, Christian Science, and other non-Nicene sects tend to exploit their members financially; I would argue the Unitarian Universalists exploit their members politically.

I think some Nicene churches are also cults, and there are grounds for denying the Christian appelation to them.  The Seventh Day Adventists, in particular, due to the length they will go to, to defend the infallibility of the alleged prophecy of Ellen G White, while simultaneously making every effort to attack the Roman Catholic church, all the while claiming falsely to teach Sola Scriptura (when they really teach Sola Ellen G White, even daring to call her the Spirit of Prophecy).  Also, in claiming Jesus Christ and St. Michael the Archangel are the same person, this is implicitly Arian (some SDAs are Arian, although the denomination officially recognizes the Trinity), they seem to me to reject the identity of Christ in a manner akin to the way in which the identity of Christ was rejected by the classical Arians, or by the Manichaean Gnostics, or Islam, or the Ophite Gnostics.

Also, I believe some Pentecostal and Charismatic churches and meetings are cults, and the phenomena that occur therein are of a demonic origin.  In a sense, they are inadvertantly non-Christian, in the same way that Tertullian inadvertantly embraced a similiar heresy.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2017, 11:00:23 AM by Alpha60 »
"It is logical that the actions of the human race over time will lead to its destruction.  I, Alpha 60, am merely the agent of this destruction."

- The computer Alpha 60, from Alphaville (1964) by Jean Luc Godard, the obvious inspiration for HAL-9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey. 

This signature is not intended to offend any user, nor the relatives of Discovery 1 deputy commander Dr. Frank Poole,  and crew members Dr. Victor Kaminsky, Dr. Jack Kimball, and Dr. Charles Hunter.