Author Topic: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?  (Read 13036 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,023
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #90 on: December 07, 2014, 01:36:10 AM »
Gosh Volnutt, it's as tho I was responding to a post of yours. At any rate --
It was a conversation involving me.
"Guilt is not of God" and so Len must upbraid you for not exculpating America. Is this third try at extracting his logic a charm, in your eyes?
He wasn't "upbraiding me for not exculpating America" (which I was not even close to doing- black Americans and other non-whites are American too).

He was saying that there is no Godly reason for anybody to feel guilty for being part of a people group that is strongly associated with some historical crime. I'm not sure I agree with him, but I appreciate that he cares.
Is that what they teach you at the temple volnutt-stein?

Actually, it's Volnutt-berg.

Rome doesn't care. Rome is actually very cool guy.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #91 on: December 07, 2014, 01:43:15 AM »
While I'm glad you two evidently are bonding, it's the idea of his post as well as the logic behind it that I'm trying to engage.

I do agree with you about the psychological value of collective guilt. I know it's vogue to say this, but I do actually feel kind of guilty about American slavery, whether I should or not.

Can we agree that guilt is not of God?
If so, then give up that learned response, clean the eye of your soul and get back to doing better things than listening to propaganda.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #92 on: December 07, 2014, 02:03:37 AM »
What is this "Is it necessary for salvation" talk going around the forum lately? Makes sense from somebody like Yeshuaisiam, whose understanding of "salvation" is entirely different from Orthodoxy's. From others, I'm just confused.

It means this: are you a heretic if you don't believe all Jews are personally responsible for the Crucifixion?

I would argue that you're more likely to be a heretic if you do believe that the Jews (or another ethnicity/race/nation such as the Italians/Romans) are personally responsible for the Crucifixion solely because of their ethnicity.

"Imputed Guilt", for a sin you yourself didn't commit, is a concept foreign to Orthodoxy. It has more in common with radically Augustinian theologies in the west (such as those which teach that since Adam was our "federal head", we are therefore guilty, in a juridical sense, of committing his sin). Calvinists believe in the "federal headship" idea.

If all humans are personally guilty of Adam's sin because they are descended from him, it would also imply that other kinds of ancestral guilt (and national/racial/ethnic guilt) also exist.

But the Orthodox view, if I'm not mistaken, is that we are guilty only of our own sins, yet the reason why we sin is because our nature has become diseased as a result of Adam's fall. No one ethnicity or race is more affected by the Fall than any other.

I sympathize with your view; I also don't like the idea of collective guilt, but I'm not sure how much of my distaste is informed by my classically liberal upbringing and education and how much of it is informed by Orthodoxy. Collective guilt is actually found throughout Scripture and the Fathers, as we've seen: the prophets inveigh not only generally against the Gentiles, but against specific nations like the Canaanites and Edomites. The question is, do we interpret these instances as mere rhetoric, or do they mean that an individual can be held guilty simply as a member of some group?

As for the "original sin" debate, I've read enough about it to be wary of declaring either side of the issue "heretical". I recall that St Photios the Great catalogued the un-Orthodox teachings of St Augustine, when giving a justification for his inclusion among the Fathers, but his teachings on original sin were not listed. The concern with St Augustine's teachings on original sin doesn't arise until the 20th century, with critics of "juridical theory" from figures like Met Anthony (Khrapovitsy) of ROCOR and Fr John Romanides. I'm not aware of the Church addressing this matter synodically as yet.

So at this point, I don't believe you are a heretic if you believe all Jews are personally guilty. I also don't believe you are a heretic if you don't believe they are all guilty.

Yes, I think you are right (which is why I added the "more likely to be").

It's important to keep in mind that Augustine and "Augustinianism" are not the same thing. Gottschalk was condemned prior to the schism for teaching double predestination (which Augustine never actually taught, but Gottschalk and others saw as the logical extension of his theology).

Post-schism figures like Anselm and Calvin thought of themselves as Augustinian, but they were really more "hyper-Augustinian" ("hyper" meaning "beyond"). Augustine himself never taught federal headship or the penal-satisfaction theory, but these ideas arose among Western theologians who saw themselves as carrying on his legacy.

There's been a lot of debate as to whether "Nestorius was actually a Nestorian". I would argue that Augustine was not an Augustinian, at least not in the sense with which the word came to be identified in the post-schism West.

I take your point about St Augustine not being necessarily "Augustinian", but remember that Fr John Romanides specifically accused the saint of being the originator of what he frankly (pun intended) calls the "heresy" of original sin. All in all it's a thorny topic. For my part, I believe that we all inherit sin through Adam, but by "sin" I don't necessarily mean guilt, but the broader definition of sin as "condition of falling short, separation from God, etc". Whether this condition of sin includes also an element of guilt I cannot say. To make the guilt the most significant aspect of original sin, as Western theology seems to do, seems wrong indeed. But seeing as, with respect to every other sin, guilt plays a part in our consciousness of that sin, why should it not play some role in our consciousness of original sin? Coming to baptism in all humility, faced with the supreme and unearned gift of forgiveness of sins and union with Christ, would it be out of place to feel some personal responsibility not only for one's personal sins, but also for one's original sinfulness as a member of the human race?

Collective guilt is still alive and well and seems to play an important role in our psychology, despite whatever individualist ideologies we hold. Descendants of slavers feel responsibility for the sins of their ancestors, even if they never personally owned a slave. Even whites who have no slaver ancestors can feel responsibility simply by virtue of their race. In that context, a Jew might reasonably feel some responsibility for what his ancestors did to Christ, just as Jews today feel guilty for crimes committed by their Israeli brethren against the Arabs.
Here's what it boils down to for me. Based on his ideas of inherited guilt, Calvin said that every baby is a festering pool of evil that is vile in the sight of God and that there are babies in Hell the size of an adult hand. I'm pretty sure one can't blame that on St. Augustine, at the very least.

Everything else, to me, is completely academic since nobody except Christ and the Theotokos resists sin for very long at the outset of their older life. So, the "darkened nous/inherited propensity to sin" idea is really the only thing that has any practical value.

I do agree with you about the psychological value of collective guilt. I know it's vogue to say this, but I do actually feel kind of guilty about American slavery, whether I should or not.

Well, I wouldn't say the Orthodox Church teaches that unbaptized children who die in infancy get a free pass to Heaven. There's a reason the Church has long practiced infant baptism. I think for most people the idea that unbaptized children would be severely tormented in Hell simply for original sin seems repugnant, so they prefer to imagine some kind of Limbo where the children don't suffer per se, but we can't put them on the same level as baptized children without undermining baptism itself.

I guess a corollary of this natural repugnance against undeserved punishment of unbaptized infants is a repugnance towards the idea of inherited guilt or collective guilt. I think it does go ahead the moral compass of many people to impute the sins of the fathers to the children. Certainly when you have some other person try to accuse you and make you feel guilty for something you had no part in, it is very irksome (one could bring up "white male guilt" and similar phenomena, though that's getting too close to politics). Christian anti-Semites who go on about Jewish guilt are also for the same reasons rarely going to persuade any actual Jews, just as bashing Catholics and insisting they accept responsibility for every atrocity ever committed by Catholics is very counter-productive.

Yet, I think all this falls into the problem of plucking the beam out of your own eye before picking out the mote in your brother's eye. Maybe collective guilt is reasonable and justified, but the supposedly guilty one has to come to a realization of his own responsibility. You can't force it on others.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #93 on: December 07, 2014, 02:07:34 AM »
Why wouldn't the Church accepting infants for baptism so that they can participate in the fullness of the Christian life along with their families be a satisfying reason for the tradition?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,023
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #94 on: December 07, 2014, 02:39:22 AM »

Well, I wouldn't say the Orthodox Church teaches that unbaptized children who die in infancy get a free pass to Heaven. There's a reason the Church has long practiced infant baptism. I think for most people the idea that unbaptized children would be severely tormented in Hell simply for original sin seems repugnant, so they prefer to imagine some kind of Limbo where the children don't suffer per se, but we can't put them on the same level as baptized children without undermining baptism itself.

I guess a corollary of this natural repugnance against undeserved punishment of unbaptized infants is a repugnance towards the idea of inherited guilt or collective guilt. I think it does go ahead the moral compass of many people to impute the sins of the fathers to the children. Certainly when you have some other person try to accuse you and make you feel guilty for something you had no part in, it is very irksome (one could bring up "white male guilt" and similar phenomena, though that's getting too close to politics). Christian anti-Semites who go on about Jewish guilt are also for the same reasons rarely going to persuade any actual Jews, just as bashing Catholics and insisting they accept responsibility for every atrocity ever committed by Catholics is very counter-productive.

Yet, I think all this falls into the problem of plucking the beam out of your own eye before picking out the mote in your brother's eye. Maybe collective guilt is reasonable and justified, but the supposedly guilty one has to come to a realization of his own responsibility. You can't force it on others.
If the repentant thief on the cross was saved, I don't see why an unbaptized baby wouldn't be. Maybe you can make a case for careless or lazy parents getting their children sent to Hell (but that isn't much easier to accept) but a stillborn baby couldn't possibly be baptized. If we can speculate till the cows come home about the fate of adults who never had a chance to convert or whatever, then we should be able to extend it to those who don't know what conversion and baptism even are.

At the very least, I'd call it a strong argument for truth of The River of Fire.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 02:41:34 AM by Volnutt »
Is that what they teach you at the temple volnutt-stein?

Actually, it's Volnutt-berg.

Rome doesn't care. Rome is actually very cool guy.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #95 on: December 07, 2014, 09:55:21 AM »
Okay. So America's of God now?

Yes, I find God had/has something to do regarding America. So? Others may think not.
The world at that time had no other notions, not even close, to what was started here. If you find another, let me know.

It is clear that any peoples, like America, has blood, shame and madness or can be accused of misdeeds in their struggles but you read me less than accurate.
It is where we teach our children the difference of shame or rightful pride. And why teach children and young people an ethos different from those guys that started this experiment?
If there are teachable moments in the life of a young one, we may teach them things that will affirm the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, or that all are created equal.
What a silly notion! "All are created equal" only works when you further teach them that before God all are equal, as leaving the "God particle" out begets all manner of silliness.
Yeah, to START a country BUILT on ideals and struggle to achieve and live out such is as silly as Orthodoxy. The only difference is that the former is an experiment while the latter is not.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #96 on: December 07, 2014, 09:57:02 AM »
While I'm glad you two evidently are bonding, it's the idea of his post as well as the logic behind it that I'm trying to engage.

I do agree with you about the psychological value of collective guilt. I know it's vogue to say this, but I do actually feel kind of guilty about American slavery, whether I should or not.

Can we agree that guilt is not of God?
If so, then give up that learned response, clean the eye of your soul and get back to doing better things than listening to propaganda.

So far I am not engaged in your thought process. Clarity is needed on both our parts?
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #97 on: December 07, 2014, 12:33:11 PM »
Okay. So America's of God now?

Yes, I find God had/has something to do regarding America. So? Others may think not.
The world at that time had no other notions, not even close, to what was started here. If you find another, let me know.

It is clear that any peoples, like America, has blood, shame and madness or can be accused of misdeeds in their struggles but you read me less than accurate.
It is where we teach our children the difference of shame or rightful pride. And why teach children and young people an ethos different from those guys that started this experiment?
If there are teachable moments in the life of a young one, we may teach them things that will affirm the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, or that all are created equal.
What a silly notion! "All are created equal" only works when you further teach them that before God all are equal, as leaving the "God particle" out begets all manner of silliness.
Yeah, to START a country BUILT on ideals and struggle to achieve and live out such is as silly as Orthodoxy. The only difference is that the former is an experiment while the latter is not.

Thank you for expanding. As I feared, you are assigning a holiness to America of a kind you think ought arbitrarily to excuse her of sins.

I couldn't disagree more with that conclusion, and I think the logic it takes you to reach it is silly. We will certainly all bear some guilt for a system we support or from which we profit -- "Babylon the great is fallen! is fallen!" -- and to liken the founding of America to some sacred experiment, much less the Church, is silly but is also in my opinion to confuse wantonness ("liberty") with virtue -- "Shall we sin, that grace may abound?"

At any rate, to call appeals to conscience "propaganda" and to say "guilt is not of God" are fairly large moral mistakes.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #98 on: December 07, 2014, 01:45:46 PM »
Why wouldn't the Church accepting infants for baptism so that they can participate in the fullness of the Christian life along with their families be a satisfying reason for the tradition?

OK, but why is full participation in the Christian life so important? They're more than just empty rituals. To say that unbaptized infants will be treated the same as baptized infants implies that baptism serves no function in itself.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #99 on: December 07, 2014, 01:52:05 PM »

Well, I wouldn't say the Orthodox Church teaches that unbaptized children who die in infancy get a free pass to Heaven. There's a reason the Church has long practiced infant baptism. I think for most people the idea that unbaptized children would be severely tormented in Hell simply for original sin seems repugnant, so they prefer to imagine some kind of Limbo where the children don't suffer per se, but we can't put them on the same level as baptized children without undermining baptism itself.

I guess a corollary of this natural repugnance against undeserved punishment of unbaptized infants is a repugnance towards the idea of inherited guilt or collective guilt. I think it does go ahead the moral compass of many people to impute the sins of the fathers to the children. Certainly when you have some other person try to accuse you and make you feel guilty for something you had no part in, it is very irksome (one could bring up "white male guilt" and similar phenomena, though that's getting too close to politics). Christian anti-Semites who go on about Jewish guilt are also for the same reasons rarely going to persuade any actual Jews, just as bashing Catholics and insisting they accept responsibility for every atrocity ever committed by Catholics is very counter-productive.

Yet, I think all this falls into the problem of plucking the beam out of your own eye before picking out the mote in your brother's eye. Maybe collective guilt is reasonable and justified, but the supposedly guilty one has to come to a realization of his own responsibility. You can't force it on others.
If the repentant thief on the cross was saved, I don't see why an unbaptized baby wouldn't be. Maybe you can make a case for careless or lazy parents getting their children sent to Hell (but that isn't much easier to accept) but a stillborn baby couldn't possibly be baptized. If we can speculate till the cows come home about the fate of adults who never had a chance to convert or whatever, then we should be able to extend it to those who don't know what conversion and baptism even are.

At the very least, I'd call it a strong argument for truth of The River of Fire.

The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. He would be counted as one of the righteous awaiting deliverance in Hades. Speculation about the fate of those who die outside the boundaries of the Church is usually not a good idea, since it can lead to heresy. I think we can legitimately hope that those who die outside the Church will be saved, but we can't make it a matter of faith.

I recall The River of Fire had more to do with reconciling God's love for all with the final judgment, of which eternal torment in Gehenna is a part. I don't remember Dr Kalomiros arguing that those who die without baptism will certainly be saved, but I might be mistaken.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,023
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #100 on: December 07, 2014, 02:08:32 PM »


The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. He would be counted as one of the righteous awaiting deliverance in Hades.
I don't see how that changes anything. The point is, somebody was saved without baptism.

Is this some kind of Orthodox Feeneyism where someone who dies without access to water and a priest goes to Hell no matter what they believe about God or what their intentions are?

I recall The River of Fire had more to do with reconciling God's love for all with the final judgment, of which eternal torment in Gehenna is a part. I don't remember Dr Kalomiros arguing that those who die without baptism will certainly be saved, but I might be mistaken.
That it is. But if everybody goes into the presence and love of God when they die and Hell only consists in the rejection of Him (as Kalomiros argues), then I personally think it follows that babies, who are incapable of rejecting God would be forever in the light of His love.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 02:09:37 PM by Volnutt »
Is that what they teach you at the temple volnutt-stein?

Actually, it's Volnutt-berg.

Rome doesn't care. Rome is actually very cool guy.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #101 on: December 07, 2014, 02:17:47 PM »


The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. He would be counted as one of the righteous awaiting deliverance in Hades.
I don't see how that changes anything. The point is, somebody was saved without baptism.

Is this some kind of Orthodox Feeneyism where someone who dies without access to water and a priest goes to Hell no matter what they believe about God or what their intentions are?

I recall The River of Fire had more to do with reconciling God's love for all with the final judgment, of which eternal torment in Gehenna is a part. I don't remember Dr Kalomiros arguing that those who die without baptism will certainly be saved, but I might be mistaken.
That it is. But if everybody goes into the presence and love of God when they die and Hell only consists in the rejection of Him (as Kalomiros argues), then I personally think it follows that babies, who are incapable of rejecting God would be forever in the light of His love.

All the Old Testament saints died without baptism. They were saved by their faith at the Harrowing of Hell, when Christ "went down alive into Hades". A better example would be certain martyrs for Christ who died without baptism; they are traditionally said to have been baptized "with blood". So yes, it's definitely possible, but the only certain examples we have involve unambiguous public confession of faith in Christ followed by a violent death. As I said, we can legitimately hope that others who died outside the Church will be saved, but we can't make it a matter of faith.

Dr Kalomiros is controversial. I would be careful of using his ideas as the authoritative voice of the Church.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 02:19:07 PM by Jonathan Gress »

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,023
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #102 on: December 07, 2014, 02:28:42 PM »

All the Old Testament saints died without baptism. They were saved by their faith at the Harrowing of Hell, when Christ "went down alive into Hades". A better example would be certain martyrs for Christ who died without baptism; they are traditionally said to have been baptized "with blood". So yes, it's definitely possible, but the only certain examples we have involve unambiguous public confession of faith in Christ followed by a violent death. As I said, we can legitimately hope that others who died outside the Church will be saved, but we can't make it a matter of faith.]/quote]Ok.
Dr Kalomiros is controversial. I would be careful of using his ideas as the authoritative voice of the Church.
I know.

Sorry if I gave offense at all.
Is that what they teach you at the temple volnutt-stein?

Actually, it's Volnutt-berg.

Rome doesn't care. Rome is actually very cool guy.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #103 on: December 07, 2014, 05:31:10 PM »
Why wouldn't the Church accepting infants for baptism so that they can participate in the fullness of the Christian life along with their families be a satisfying reason for the tradition?

OK, but why is full participation in the Christian life so important? They're more than just empty rituals. To say that unbaptized infants will be treated the same as baptized infants implies that baptism serves no function in itself.

Whether considered individually or collectively, it is humankind's salvation.

If the Church had decided to refuse baptism to the infants that Christian families' presented (and some Fathers thought they should), then they would have been saying in effect that the kingdom of God relies on man's intellect, or man's ability, or making other false implications like that. The Christ tells us he came to save the world, of whom, it can't be denied, infants and children are a rather large proportion.

In any case, "they'll burn in hell if they aren't baptized" doesn't really avoid the questions you think my comment raises, either.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 05:31:55 PM by Porter ODoran »
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #104 on: December 07, 2014, 05:33:05 PM »
The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. ...

This seems excessively legalistic. (And the law under which it would operate as a technicality -- well, where do you find it in the dogma of the Church?)
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #105 on: December 07, 2014, 05:43:29 PM »
Why wouldn't the Church accepting infants for baptism so that they can participate in the fullness of the Christian life along with their families be a satisfying reason for the tradition?

OK, but why is full participation in the Christian life so important? They're more than just empty rituals. To say that unbaptized infants will be treated the same as baptized infants implies that baptism serves no function in itself.

Whether considered individually or collectively, it is humankind's salvation.

If the Church had decided to refuse baptism to the infants that Christian families' presented (and some Fathers thought they should), then they would have been saying in effect that the kingdom of God relies on man's intellect, or man's ability, or making other false implications like that. The Christ tells us he came to save the world, of whom, it can't be denied, infants and children are a rather large proportion.

In any case, "they'll burn in hell if they aren't baptized" doesn't really avoid the questions you think my comment raises, either.

Are you trying to argue that we can be certain children who die without baptism will be saved, or are you just arguing that they we can hope they can be saved? There's a crucial difference there.

I don't know the context of the Fathers you refer to, but I can certainly understand an argument along the following lines: if lax parents, who do not participate in Church life and who are very unlikely to raise their child in a proper Orthodox manner, bring their child to be baptized, the priest might refuse to perform the baptism since the parents, who are standing in for the child, have insincere faith. So it's analogous to a priest refusing to baptize an adult whose faith is obviously insincere. This is because, while it is better to be baptized than not baptized, it is still better not to be baptized than to be baptized, then fall away from the faith and earn greater condemnation for having spurned one's baptism.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #106 on: December 07, 2014, 05:46:54 PM »
The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. ...

This seems excessively legalistic. (And the law under which it would operate as a technicality -- well, where do you find it in the dogma of the Church?)

Where do you find your dogma that we can have any certainty those who die outside the Church will be saved?

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #107 on: December 07, 2014, 06:10:27 PM »
The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. ...

This seems excessively legalistic. (And the law under which it would operate as a technicality -- well, where do you find it in the dogma of the Church?)

Where do you find your dogma that we can have any certainty those who die outside the Church will be saved?

Oh! So you're convinced that your rather elaborate technical explanation of pre- and post-Resurrection dispensations is the only way to preserve the integrity of the Church against the fact of saved ancients? I'm not so convinced.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #108 on: December 07, 2014, 06:14:01 PM »
Okay. So America's of God now?

Yes, I find God had/has something to do regarding America. So? Others may think not.
The world at that time had no other notions, not even close, to what was started here. If you find another, let me know.

It is clear that any peoples, like America, has blood, shame and madness or can be accused of misdeeds in their struggles but you read me less than accurate.
It is where we teach our children the difference of shame or rightful pride. And why teach children and young people an ethos different from those guys that started this experiment?
If there are teachable moments in the life of a young one, we may teach them things that will affirm the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, or that all are created equal.
What a silly notion! "All are created equal" only works when you further teach them that before God all are equal, as leaving the "God particle" out begets all manner of silliness.
Yeah, to START a country BUILT on ideals and struggle to achieve and live out such is as silly as Orthodoxy. The only difference is that the former is an experiment while the latter is not.

Thank you for expanding. As I feared, you are assigning a holiness to America of a kind you think ought arbitrarily to excuse her of sins.

I couldn't disagree more with that conclusion, and I think the logic it takes you to reach it is silly. We will certainly all bear some guilt for a system we support or from which we profit -- "Babylon the great is fallen! is fallen!" -- and to liken the founding of America to some sacred experiment, much less the Church, is silly but is also in my opinion to confuse wantonness ("liberty") with virtue -- "Shall we sin, that grace may abound?"

At any rate, to call appeals to conscience "propaganda" and to say "guilt is not of God" are fairly large moral mistakes.

I am at a loss to explain how you can draw a conclusion not given and then disagree with that incorrect conclusion!
If by assigning "holiness" to or country, you are right, we do stand apart from the world for reasons given and more. If you find God is either not involved in the lives of people or does not care about what men call politics and peoples en mass, then make your point as I see what is given is empty.
It is not "arbitrary to excuse her sins" and quite truthfully I have no idea what that fully means.
This communist notion of "collective guilt"...how does that work? How far back, in time, does it go? To Adam. Jesus, to Plymoth Rock, the Mexican War was mentioned....return those states? Slavery?o How would your ilk address that? It is absurd and not only on the face of it. Is there a system this side of Heaven that equilibrates the wrongs and rectification done to any group or persons? You call for the ideal of justice, but it is just that, an ideal. You have guilt for supporting....what system? Slavery, and you profited from this? Lucky you! Now go and dissolve those insurance companies that supported the vessels that brought those Africans to this country, taking them away from their paradise. Then distribute that money to their ancestors after you have racially profiled each, since having one drop of African blood makes that individual African. Glad we are getting over the racial divide! Besides, the DAR is already having a tough time admitting the Africans were here before they were.
Wait, you support the "you didn't build that' notion spoken to those that worked to build their businesses?
Now I get it! You drank the kool-aid and liked the taste!
As you cannot discern wantonness from liberty and are equating the two there, I may conclude you have other notions of our great country that must be handled outside this forum, per the rules.
Oh, I, as the founders did, do not bring The Church into the start of this country, but God , faith and His people, in the form of Providence. I see the word you use was "silly" regarding the logic.....good word, but then again, poorly applied.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,183
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #109 on: December 07, 2014, 06:26:43 PM »
Justice and sin aren't primarily political issues, and, yes, there are proper and blessed ways to handle them "this side of heaven." The Church (whose saints are the [i[true [/i] inspired and blameless ones) can be our teacher.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #110 on: December 07, 2014, 06:53:33 PM »
Justice and sin aren't primarily political issues, and, yes, there are proper and blessed ways to handle them "this side of heaven." The Church (whose saints are the [i[true [/i] inspired and blameless ones) can be our teacher.

Oh.
Ok
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline WPM

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,468
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #111 on: December 07, 2014, 06:57:23 PM »
Complete with the idea that man lives forever.  ;)
Learn meditation.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #112 on: December 07, 2014, 07:14:07 PM »
Complete with the idea that man lives forever.  ;)

Saints
The contents of The Creed
Marriage
All the virtues.
Loving your enemies
Creation
The Trinity

More foolish notions?
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #113 on: December 07, 2014, 09:06:43 PM »
The repentant thief is not a good example since he died before the Resurrection. ...

This seems excessively legalistic. (And the law under which it would operate as a technicality -- well, where do you find it in the dogma of the Church?)

Where do you find your dogma that we can have any certainty those who die outside the Church will be saved?

Oh! So you're convinced that your rather elaborate technical explanation of pre- and post-Resurrection dispensations is the only way to preserve the integrity of the Church against the fact of saved ancients? I'm not so convinced.

Well, the only saints we know of who didn't receive baptism are: 1) Old Testament patriarchs and prophets, and 2) New Testament martyrs who died after making a public confession of Christianity but before they could be baptized. If you wanted to persuade me that unbaptized children will certainly go to Heaven, you will need examples of unbaptized children who become venerated as saints. There might be such examples, but I don't know of any.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,023
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #114 on: December 08, 2014, 05:01:07 AM »
Complete with the idea that man lives forever.  ;)
You wanted an answer why people misunderstand you? Snipe comments like this with absolutely no follow up make you look like all you're here to do is troll.

But please, keep on telling us why you think Christianity is absurd but magick is worth looking in to. :laugh: ::)
Is that what they teach you at the temple volnutt-stein?

Actually, it's Volnutt-berg.

Rome doesn't care. Rome is actually very cool guy.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,023
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Does the Orthodox Church teach that the Jews killed Jesus?
« Reply #115 on: December 08, 2014, 07:16:17 AM »
« Last Edit: December 08, 2014, 07:17:02 AM by Volnutt »
Is that what they teach you at the temple volnutt-stein?

Actually, it's Volnutt-berg.

Rome doesn't care. Rome is actually very cool guy.