Author Topic: could this be a mormon plot  (Read 9274 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

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: 6,891
  • 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.
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,985
  • 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: 7,985
  • 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: 7,985
  • 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: 6,891
  • 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 »
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline Antonious Nikolas

  • Orthodox Christian, Miaphysite
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,891
  • 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 »
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,985
  • 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: 19,768
  • 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: 6,891
  • 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 »
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,007
  • 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: 6,891
  • 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.
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,502
    • 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: 6,891
  • 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.
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,985
  • 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: 6,891
  • 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 »
Now accepting brief PMs.

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: 6,891
  • 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;)
Now accepting brief PMs.

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,953
  • Faith: Orthodox
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

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,953
  • Faith: Orthodox
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

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.