Author Topic: Cannibalism?  (Read 37234 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #45 on: December 28, 2014, 09:01:11 PM »
First ask your mother to read :
John 6
53So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.
 54"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.…

Ask her if she wants you to have no life in yourself or to have eternal life.

Then explain to her that the Church on the Bible in Chapters named the Acts of Apostles was led by Apostle James. Apostle James has written the Holy Liturgy of James http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.xii.ii.html centered on giving Holy Communion to people. Apostles Thomas and Peter wrote Holy Liturgies centered to giving Holy Communion aka flesh and blood to people. Ask your mother if the 3 Apostles could be wrong.

Holy Liturgy would detail a Sunday service from a to z. The Church celebrated Holy Liturgies giving people blood and flesh since Apostles to the following centuries 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15.

Since 15th century, the writtings of Apostles were thrown away and Sola Bible remained and the problem is that Bible does not contain a Holy Liturgy or Sunday service and that every Sunday service made from Bible is 99 % imagination. Ask her why 99% imagination is better than what Apostles have done.

Ask your mother to find for you a historical document showing before 15th century a Sunday service similar with what she is doing or a Church believing what she believes. There were so many Church writers before 1500+. Which one did mention Sola Scriptura? One mention pleaseeeee.....
« Last Edit: December 28, 2014, 09:23:40 PM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #46 on: December 28, 2014, 09:27:02 PM »
Apostle Luke made icons, Jesus made an icon. Could they be wrong?
« Last Edit: December 28, 2014, 09:29:11 PM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,534
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #47 on: December 28, 2014, 09:47:56 PM »
Apostles Thomas and Peter wrote Holy Liturgies centered to giving Holy Communion aka flesh and blood to people. Ask your mother if the 3 Apostles could be wrong.

Not only can three apostles be wrong, but one pasadi97 can surely be wrong.  The apostle Thomas never composed a Liturgy which is in existence, let alone use. 

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #48 on: December 29, 2014, 12:02:39 AM »
If you want put Apostle and Evangelist Mark http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.xii.iii.html instead of Apostle Thomas.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2014, 12:03:50 AM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #49 on: December 29, 2014, 12:14:32 AM »
Orthodox miracle of Lanciano
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbcL4mkNfzM

To find out the truth about this miracle and certify it , many experts were called , and were made more scientific analysis of an absolute rigorously documented by a series of photographs taken under a microscope ( Prof. Drs . Odoardo linoleic and Ruggero Bertelli are some important names ) , who gave these results:

Flesh is true flesh. BLOOD IS TRUE BLOOD .
Flesh and blood belongs to a completed human "heart" being its essential structure
IN MEAT there ARE PRESENT  sectional myocardium and endocardium
Flesh and blood have the same blood type ( which is the same as blood on the Shroud of Turin !!! ) and is : AB !!!
Blood contains normal proteins fractionated in the same percentages as in the SERUM OF FRESH BLOOD
Blood contains minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium , potassium, sodium and calcium

I wish Dr. Linnoli's journal article was actually available in English and that they had had it tested by a non-Christian doctor instead of the super Catholic that Linnoli is as far as I can tell.

I've never seen the claim about fresh blood serum in my own research. AB is the most common blood type in the Middle East, but that really doesn't prove it's Jesus' pericardium.

The only possible natural explanation would seem to be that the heart is from a human cadaver. Linnoli claimed that getting such a perfect cut of a human heart as this would require medical knowledge, which he claims was not advanced enough in the tenth century for such a precise dissection. I think that's a claim that leads a lot more testing on a couple of different fronts.

I don't know what Orthodoxy would say about it, but I also someone on CAF criticism the miracle on Catholic theological grounds, claiming that the host only turning into part of the Body of Christ and not just turning into the entire Person was a violation of the Catholic view of the Real Presence.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #50 on: December 29, 2014, 12:17:43 AM »
MAtthew 26
26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.


Can Jesus be wrong giving his body and blood to be eaten?

OR you can ask your mother to say the following prayer:

Dear God please let me know which is the best religion and denomination in your eyes and why. Amen.

People praying to find best religion and denomination end from my experience in Eastern Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2014, 12:40:58 AM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Kmon23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Bulgarian
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #51 on: December 29, 2014, 04:08:44 AM »
I tend to look at it this way. Is the means of eating actually the consumption of fleshy flesh and red blood?
When someone is in the hospital and an IV drip is put into the person, we can say that there are nutrients in it. Would we accuse this person as actually 'eating' food? Health wise, sure (absorption of nutrients), but if there were human tissue in the IV drip I don't think many would call it cannibalism.
Same thing with vaccinations. A question was asked recently on CAF about how to deal with vaccinations that contain human diploid cells from aborted fetuses.
Yet, I don't see anyone today calling this vaccination an act of cannibalism.

The bread and wine being true flesh and true blood is true (as Christ and the church has taught us), but how it is so is a complete mystery.
One thing I do know is that there isn't any dripping blood or squishy human flesh in our mouths when we eat the Eucharist. We truly are consuming Christ's flesh and blood, but the means of it through the Eucharist do not make it cannibalism.

Although Orthodoxy does not subscribe to transubstantiation, I do think it helps what a Catholic response would be. With transubstantiation, true flesh and blood is consumed THROUGH THE MEANS OF THE BREAD AND WINE, and it is through the means that it cannot be cannibalism. This is similar to the IV drip or vaccination example. One may be absorbing human flesh, nutrients, whatever, but the means itself is not cannibalism.

Hope this helps.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #52 on: December 29, 2014, 05:58:01 AM »
MAtthew 26
26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.


Can Jesus be wrong giving his body and blood to be eaten?

OR you can ask your mother to say the following prayer:

Dear God please let me know which is the best religion and denomination in your eyes and why. Amen.

People praying to find best religion and denomination end from my experience in Eastern Orthodoxy.
Pasadi, are you going to engage Volnutt's rebuttal of your account of Dr. Linnoli's analysis of an alleged Eucharist miracle?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #53 on: December 29, 2014, 07:39:16 AM »
The text that I have added was the text available on youtube. In orthodoxy there is a mystery the transformation and I am not aware of claims that it should be entire body.

Another miracle is how for 1200 years we do have today flesh and blood and how these are incorrupted. I heard of a similar miracle in Orthodox Church in our days.
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #54 on: December 29, 2014, 01:11:47 PM »
The text that I have added was the text available on youtube. In orthodoxy there is a mystery the transformation and I am not aware of claims that it should be entire body.
How does this speak to Volnutt's rebuttal?

Another miracle is how for 1200 years we do have today flesh and blood and how these are incorrupted. I heard of a similar miracle in Orthodox Church in our days.
What miracle? If it truly happened, I'm sure we would have documentation of it or at least a widespread oral tradition of it so we don't have to rely solely on your witness to it.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #55 on: December 29, 2014, 02:27:10 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

In Lanciano Italy, there is Holy Communion as flesh and blood and an historical document saying a priest in 8th century did not believe in real presence in Holy Communion. When he celebrated Holy Liturgy, the Holy Communion turned into real flesh and real blood. That Holy Communion was exposed at Lanciano .

There are many documents on net and youtube about Lanciano miracle so there is a tradition.
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/physician-tells-of-eucharistic-miracle-of-lanciano
"Linoli's analysis revealed no traces of preservatives in the elements, meaning that the blood could not have been extracted from a corpse, because it would have been rapidly altered."
« Last Edit: December 29, 2014, 02:55:21 PM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • Monahos.net: "Lawful Evil"; OC.net: "Chaotic Evil"
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #56 on: December 29, 2014, 02:38:26 PM »
... did not believe in real presence and that the Holy Communion turned into real presence, and that what we have there is Holy Communion turned into real presence, real flesh and real blood. ...

smh
"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 PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #57 on: December 29, 2014, 02:54:27 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

In Lanciano Italy, there is Holy Communion as flesh and blood and an historical document saying a priest in 8th century did not believe in real presence and that the Holy Communion turned into real presence, and that what we have there is Holy Communion turned into real presence, real flesh and real blood.
What historical document?

There are many documents on net and youtube about Lanciano miracle so there is a tradition.
I'm sorry, but I've seen enough youtube videos to know that a presence on youtube does not prove a widespread tradition.

http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/physician-tells-of-eucharistic-miracle-of-lanciano
"Linoli's analysis revealed no traces of preservatives in the elements, meaning that the blood could not have been extracted from a corpse, because it would have been rapidly altered."
With all the documents we have online attempting to refute the alleged miracle, articles that point out such things as the lack of any historical documentation dating earlier than about the 1700's (900 years after the alleged miracle) to prove that what we see now as body and blood ever was bread and wine, Dr. Linnoli's very strong pro-Catholic bias, etc., I'm not sure anyone but you would ever find your accounts of the miracle convincing, and therein lies the rub. The task the OP has presented to us is how we might convince her Protestant, apparently rationalist and anti-sacramental mother that the Orthodox reception of Communion is not cannibalism. I think, therefore, that you're appealing to the wrong motives. She's not going to be convinced by tales of alleged miracles.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #58 on: December 29, 2014, 03:12:07 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

In Lanciano Italy, there is Holy Communion as flesh and blood and an historical document saying a priest in 8th century did not believe in real presence in Holy Communion. When he celebrated Holy Liturgy, the Holy Communion turned into real flesh and real blood. That Holy Communion was exposed at Lanciano .

There are many documents on net and youtube about Lanciano miracle so there is a tradition.
http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/physician-tells-of-eucharistic-miracle-of-lanciano
"Linoli's analysis revealed no traces of preservatives in the elements, meaning that the blood could not have been extracted from a corpse, because it would have been rapidly altered."
As far as I can tell, there is no "Higher Council" of the World Health Organization as mentioned in the Zenit article. They have a General Assembly that meets once a year in Geneva, but I don't think it's responsible for ordering specific studies. So, either that article is mistranslated or there's some chicanery going on.

I would still really like to see Linoli's article in English to see if he actually says that about the preservatives because the Zenit article is the only thing on the English speaking web that makes such a claim. If Lanciano was really such a slam dunk, I think it would show up in more than a handful of online sources- maybe it's more popular on the Italian speaking web, though. I wouldn't know.

« Last Edit: December 29, 2014, 03:13:55 PM by Volnutt »
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,656
  • too often left in the payment of false ponchos
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #59 on: December 29, 2014, 03:17:05 PM »
I tend to look at it this way. Is the means of eating actually the consumption of fleshy flesh and red blood?
When someone is in the hospital and an IV drip is put into the person, we can say that there are nutrients in it. Would we accuse this person as actually 'eating' food? Health wise, sure (absorption of nutrients), but if there were human tissue in the IV drip I don't think many would call it cannibalism.
Same thing with vaccinations. A question was asked recently on CAF about how to deal with vaccinations that contain human diploid cells from aborted fetuses.
Yet, I don't see anyone today calling this vaccination an act of cannibalism.

The bread and wine being true flesh and true blood is true (as Christ and the church has taught us), but how it is so is a complete mystery.
One thing I do know is that there isn't any dripping blood or squishy human flesh in our mouths when we eat the Eucharist. We truly are consuming Christ's flesh and blood, but the means of it through the Eucharist do not make it cannibalism.

Although Orthodoxy does not subscribe to transubstantiation, I do think it helps what a Catholic response would be. With transubstantiation, true flesh and blood is consumed THROUGH THE MEANS OF THE BREAD AND WINE, and it is through the means that it cannot be cannibalism. This is similar to the IV drip or vaccination example. One may be absorbing human flesh, nutrients, whatever, but the means itself is not cannibalism.

Hope this helps.

I think that this is a very important point. The Jehovah's Witnesses claim that accepting a blood transfusion amounts to cannibalism, though they do allow their people to accept plasma (ie. a part of human blood).

They've been criticized for their reasoning on both grounds.
Christ my God, set my heart on fire with love in You, that in its flame I may love You with all my heart, with all my mind, and with all my soul and with all my strength, and my neighbor as myself, so that by keeping Your commandments I may glorify You the Giver of every good and perfect gift. Amen.

Offline Ebor

  • Vanyar
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,492
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #60 on: January 03, 2015, 02:47:01 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #61 on: January 03, 2015, 05:23:56 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

Funny thing, as I poorly understand it, the Greeks and Romans hired guys to write FABULOUS things about themselves and it was expected. They had no notion of "clear" and "independent" notions of history so it was truly propaganda which was not a shameful thing back in the day. They were not noted for modesty but there was a virtue of Modesty, however it was not applicable to their own exploits, but rather a personal, daily manner of conduct.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #62 on: January 03, 2015, 05:54:42 PM »
Orthodox Church timeline from Apostles to now not from yesterday or 1500+ to now:
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Timeline_of_Church_History
Leaders of the Jerusalem Church (see middle of the page) from Apostles to now not from yesterday or 1500+ to now.These people, including Apostles partook the body and blood of Jesus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Orthodox_Patriarch_of_Jerusalem
« Last Edit: January 03, 2015, 06:05:05 PM by pasadi97 »
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • Monahos.net: "Lawful Evil"; OC.net: "Chaotic Evil"
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #63 on: January 03, 2015, 06:17:03 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

Funny thing, as I poorly understand it, the Greeks and Romans hired guys to write FABULOUS things about themselves and it was expected. They had no notion of "clear" and "independent" notions of history so it was truly propaganda which was not a shameful thing back in the day. They were not noted for modesty but there was a virtue of Modesty, however it was not applicable to their own exploits, but rather a personal, daily manner of conduct.

This doesn't sound anything like the mode of the ancient historians, but maybe you are thinking of some particular era or instance that escapes me.
"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 Ebor

  • Vanyar
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,492
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #64 on: January 03, 2015, 08:13:26 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

Funny thing, as I poorly understand it, the Greeks and Romans hired guys to write FABULOUS things about themselves and it was expected. They had no notion of "clear" and "independent" notions of history so it was truly propaganda which was not a shameful thing back in the day. They were not noted for modesty but there was a virtue of Modesty, however it was not applicable to their own exploits, but rather a personal, daily manner of conduct.

The Romans did keep records of things like places and legions and roads and political things.  Then there are artifacts like coins that can be dated by such things as who/what is shown on them or lead pipes that were cast with names of officials who were responsible or buildings or things like that. They did this over a large empire and these things have been found.

So using these sorts of documents and objects one can do real history like showing that there were Romans in what is now England in the mid 1st through the early 5th centuries for example.  It is much more than a matter of someone saying "here is a document that Romans were in Britain" and if someone doesn't belief then there's "not much to do". 

I hope that that is more clear as to what I meant.
"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #65 on: January 03, 2015, 08:46:16 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

Funny thing, as I poorly understand it, the Greeks and Romans hired guys to write FABULOUS things about themselves and it was expected. They had no notion of "clear" and "independent" notions of history so it was truly propaganda which was not a shameful thing back in the day. They were not noted for modesty but there was a virtue of Modesty, however it was not applicable to their own exploits, but rather a personal, daily manner of conduct.

This doesn't sound anything like the mode of the ancient historians, but maybe you are thinking of some particular era or instance that escapes me.
Those that followed their patrons around to record the events undertaken wrote them in a flattering light, rather than bite the hand that fed them. One that did not was Livy but he was an exception to the standard.
Pictor wasn't the first annalist to start the tradition since Greek precedents had PR men for their patrons previously.
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Porter ODoran

  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • Monahos.net: "Lawful Evil"; OC.net: "Chaotic Evil"
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #66 on: January 03, 2015, 08:51:38 PM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

Funny thing, as I poorly understand it, the Greeks and Romans hired guys to write FABULOUS things about themselves and it was expected. They had no notion of "clear" and "independent" notions of history so it was truly propaganda which was not a shameful thing back in the day. They were not noted for modesty but there was a virtue of Modesty, however it was not applicable to their own exploits, but rather a personal, daily manner of conduct.

This doesn't sound anything like the mode of the ancient historians, but maybe you are thinking of some particular era or instance that escapes me.
Those that followed their patrons around to record the events undertaken wrote them in a flattering light, rather than bite the hand that fed them. One that did not was Livy but he was an exception to the standard.
Pictor wasn't the first annalist to start the tradition since Greek precedents had PR men for their patrons previously.

Again, this doesn't sound like the mode to me. History was considered a science since Herodotus, tho obviously the way it was gone about was different from what we are used to now. But maybe you're thinking about imperial propaganda, like inscriptions. Or maybe I'm overreacting.
"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 PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #67 on: January 04, 2015, 01:35:34 AM »
This thread is about how to defend our belief in the Eucharist against misconceptions of cannibalism, not about the study of history.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • Monahos.net: "Lawful Evil"; OC.net: "Chaotic Evil"
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #68 on: January 04, 2015, 02:24:20 AM »
Gosh I actually wasn't aware this was that thread. How threads change.
"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: Cannibalism?
« Reply #69 on: January 04, 2015, 11:42:32 AM »
This is how history works. You get a document saying this and this happened at this time. If someone says I don't believe the document there is not much to do.

No, that is not how history works.  Real history is not based just on "a document".  Such a thing might be real or a fake or a forgery.  Is the person who wrote it or says that such a thing is true a reliable source?  Is it based on facts or someone's imagination or misunderstanding?  Can it be examined by others or is it "missing" or "lost" or in some unrevealed location?

If a person says that they don't believe the document then more proof could be offered (if there is any) or they could be asked why.

Funny thing, as I poorly understand it, the Greeks and Romans hired guys to write FABULOUS things about themselves and it was expected. They had no notion of "clear" and "independent" notions of history so it was truly propaganda which was not a shameful thing back in the day. They were not noted for modesty but there was a virtue of Modesty, however it was not applicable to their own exploits, but rather a personal, daily manner of conduct.

This doesn't sound anything like the mode of the ancient historians, but maybe you are thinking of some particular era or instance that escapes me.
Those that followed their patrons around to record the events undertaken wrote them in a flattering light, rather than bite the hand that fed them. One that did not was Livy but he was an exception to the standard.
Pictor wasn't the first annalist to start the tradition since Greek precedents had PR men for their patrons previously.

Again, this doesn't sound like the mode to me. History was considered a science since Herodotus, tho obviously the way it was gone about was different from what we are used to now. But maybe you're thinking about imperial propaganda, like inscriptions. Or maybe I'm overreacting.

No, I think you caught me with my pants brains down!
Clarification: from Herodotus on WE think of history as science, (different from tribal stories, etc)  and you are right in that those folks approached their findings from an "objective" notion, however much of what they penned happened decades and centuries from their time period, but they tried to find out 'the truth' albeit from a 'Greek' or 'Roman' POV.
What I poorly, and failed in my attempt, wrote was that those scribes contemporary to their patrons would record current events in a light favorable to their benefactors.  Hardly not objective in this case.
My bad. However when we now look at what those scribes wrote, a grain of salt is needed.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2015, 11:43:20 AM by LenInSebastopol »
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline pasadi97

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,110
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #70 on: January 04, 2015, 02:11:22 PM »
You may ask your mother to read Apostles writings:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,63011.0.html
God the Father is great. God the Father is good.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,775
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #71 on: March 17, 2016, 07:15:32 AM »
Quote
The Orthodox position is different than the Catholic one on the topic, which is what she is probably thinking of. The Catholic position is Transubstantiation, which is that it is physical blood, while the Protestant one is that it is just a spiritual change. The Orthodox position is that it is a mystery. So we don't require people to have a definite belief in the physical nature like your Mom is thinking about.
~Rakovsky
Also, Rakovsky's point could stand stressing.

The critical point in the Roman Catholic eucharist is when a bell is rung pinpointing the instant the molecules of wafer become molecules of God-Man. This is heresy, according to Orthodox teaching. The critical point in our Eucharist is the prayer by which the Holy Spirit is invoked to enter the hearts of the faithful. This is non-negotiably orthodox, as I understand it.

There's a difference.
Thank you for your compliment, Porter, however I need to be more specific.

It's true that the Church fathers and Orthodox theologians are not united in full Transubstantiation, since Jesus' presence could directly in the food whereby Jesus' actual body could be in real bread in spirit mode the same way that Jesus' body passed into and through a door in John 20. That was Luther's explanation, and I don't find Orthodox theologians and Church fathers to be united on whether the Catholic or Lutheran position is correct.

However, Orthodox as a consensus rule out the Reformed protestant version whereby the bread itself lacks Jesus' direct specific presence. It's not only that the Holy Spirit or Jesus enters our hearts in the ritual, but that when Jesus gives the apostles food in his hands and says "This is my body", then Orthodox/, Catholics, Lutherans unanimously agree that this is actually true in reality.

Luther's explanation was that the words "am/is/was" are not "signif-y/-ies/-ied" in the New Testament. If Jesus talks about the concept of a vine, lamb, or door or rock, and says "I am the door", he means a "spiritual door". His statement means "I am a spiritual door." But when Jesus or a New Testament writer points to a specific, concrete, real thing and uses the word "is/was/am", then Jesus means this literally so. When Jesus pointed to his body and said "Destroy this Temple and I will restore it in three days", what he was pointing to was his specific, real body and he meant it literally that he would restore it in three days. It was not a metaphorical resurrection but a real one. So when he pointed to a real, specific piece of food and said "This is my body", he also meant this literally, so that Jesus was specifically and directly in that food.

Once we let go of all materialist obstacles to Jesus having a spiritual presence in the bread itself, and notice how Jesus was in a door in John 20 and his spirit is specifically in believers, one can also conceive that he could be specifically in food.

Does this explanation of mine make sense?
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #72 on: March 17, 2016, 07:55:41 AM »
Quote
The Orthodox position is different than the Catholic one on the topic, which is what she is probably thinking of. The Catholic position is Transubstantiation, which is that it is physical blood, while the Protestant one is that it is just a spiritual change. The Orthodox position is that it is a mystery. So we don't require people to have a definite belief in the physical nature like your Mom is thinking about.
~Rakovsky
Also, Rakovsky's point could stand stressing.

The critical point in the Roman Catholic eucharist is when a bell is rung pinpointing the instant the molecules of wafer become molecules of God-Man. This is heresy, according to Orthodox teaching. The critical point in our Eucharist is the prayer by which the Holy Spirit is invoked to enter the hearts of the faithful. This is non-negotiably orthodox, as I understand it.

There's a difference.
Thank you for your compliment, Porter, however I need to be more specific.

It's true that the Church fathers and Orthodox theologians are not united in full Transubstantiation, since Jesus' presence could directly in the food whereby Jesus' actual body could be in real bread in spirit mode the same way that Jesus' body passed into and through a door in John 20. That was Luther's explanation, and I don't find Orthodox theologians and Church fathers to be united on whether the Catholic or Lutheran position is correct.

However, Orthodox as a consensus rule out the Reformed protestant version whereby the bread itself lacks Jesus' direct specific presence. It's not only that the Holy Spirit or Jesus enters our hearts in the ritual, but that when Jesus gives the apostles food in his hands and says "This is my body", then Orthodox/, Catholics, Lutherans unanimously agree that this is actually true in reality.

Luther's explanation was that the words "am/is/was" are not "signif-y/-ies/-ied" in the New Testament. If Jesus talks about the concept of a vine, lamb, or door or rock, and says "I am the door", he means a "spiritual door". His statement means "I am a spiritual door." But when Jesus or a New Testament writer points to a specific, concrete, real thing and uses the word "is/was/am", then Jesus means this literally so. When Jesus pointed to his body and said "Destroy this Temple and I will restore it in three days", what he was pointing to was his specific, real body and he meant it literally that he would restore it in three days. It was not a metaphorical resurrection but a real one. So when he pointed to a real, specific piece of food and said "This is my body", he also meant this literally, so that Jesus was specifically and directly in that food.

Once we let go of all materialist obstacles to Jesus having a spiritual presence in the bread itself, and notice how Jesus was in a door in John 20 and his spirit is specifically in believers, one can also conceive that he could be specifically in food.

Does this explanation of mine make sense?
No.

It also doesn't make sense that you're reviving this thread after more than a year just to say this. As I asked on another thread on this Convert Issues section, how do you see these long theologizing rambles helping the potential converts for whom this section exists?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2016, 07:56:49 AM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,775
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #73 on: March 17, 2016, 08:22:18 AM »
It also doesn't make sense that you're reviving this thread after more than a year just to say this. As I asked on another thread on this Convert Issues section, how do you see these long theologizing rambles helping the potential converts for whom this section exists?
I understand.
And you do a good job keeping discussions on track.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline Avdima

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 458
  • Faith: Seeking
  • Jurisdiction: Caliphate of The Overthere...
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #74 on: March 17, 2016, 08:49:06 AM »
It is said that humans taste like pork only much better. So I say yes.

Offline rakovsky

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,775
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #75 on: March 17, 2016, 08:55:06 AM »
It is said that humans taste like pork only much better. So I say yes.
Wrong thread, bro.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #76 on: March 17, 2016, 09:04:59 AM »
It is said that humans taste like pork only much better. So I say yes.
This has not been my experience.
God bless!

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #77 on: March 17, 2016, 09:24:42 AM »
We're not God, so us eating God is not cannibalism :)

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 Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,534
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #78 on: March 17, 2016, 02:17:01 PM »
It is said that humans taste like pork only much better. So I say yes.
This has not been my experience.

Same.  I bite, but I rarely draw blood, let alone eat. 

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,389
  • Excelsior
    • Archive of Our Own works
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #79 on: March 17, 2016, 03:51:17 PM »
Don't eat people, it's Lent.
https://archiveofourown.org/users/Parakeetist


Warning: stories have mature content.

Offline LenInSebastopol

  • Dimly Illumined
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 3,595
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #80 on: March 18, 2016, 09:27:36 AM »
Time for being arbitrary and capricious is suspended during this Season?
God is The Creator of All Free Beings

Offline Thomas

  • Moderator
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,014
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #81 on: March 19, 2016, 10:48:56 PM »
Its actually not within the purpose of the Convert Issues Forum to be arbitrary or capricious, combative or unkind to each other . This Forum is the evangelical or missionary branch of the OC.Net, we are here to help others understand  the Holy Orthodox Church and its basic doctrines utilizing  resources and simple answers whenever possible. It is not a place  for jurisdictional debates or arguments, I would ask that for Great Lent you redouble your efforts to avoid the negative behavior  that occasionally creeps into this forum.

Thank you,
Thomas
Convert Issues Forum Moderator
Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #82 on: March 20, 2016, 09:41:57 AM »
Apostles Thomas and Peter wrote Holy Liturgies centered to giving Holy Communion aka flesh and blood to people. Ask your mother if the 3 Apostles could be wrong.

Not only can three apostles be wrong, but one pasadi97 can surely be wrong.  The apostle Thomas never composed a Liturgy which is in existence, let alone use.

Indeed; I believe his disciples SS Addai and Mari assisted him with liturgical matters, so the liturgy of Addai and Mari in its original, first century form, is the liturgy of St. Thomas, in a sense.

Many liturgiologists believe that the Apostles and early bishops tended to improvise their Eucharistic prayers based on a common pattern, which is basically the standard parts of the Eucharistic liturgy that are used everywhere (the reading of the epistles and the Gospel, the Sanctus, the Lord's Prayerr, and so on).  I think this is true to a point; I think the Didache outlines what the Church expected of these prayers, and St. James et al tended to recite a standard orayer from memory, which was later committed to paper, hence the early liturgical fragments, which, in the case of Hippolytus, St. Mark, St. James, Addai and Mari, and the Anaphora of the Twelve Apostles, date to around 200 AD if memory serves.

In the case of the East Syriac liturgy of Ss. Addai and Mari, perhaps this lacks the usual institution narrative because the Apostle Thomas, when he served the Eucharist to the Christians in Edessa, Babylon and India, did not have access to the written gospels or 1 Corinthians, and so instead recounted the Last Supper from memory, describing what happened as opposed to quoting the specific dialogue, and his assistants, the Holy Apostles Addai and Mari, continued in this tradition.

This is just an educated guess on my part; I do think it obvious however that the ancient liturgy of Addai and Mari does reflect the influence of St. Thomas, although in its oresent recensions it is obviously fairly far removed (having been modified to add the creed, and perhaps some Nestorian ideas, and in the RC versions, the Words of Institution).
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,534
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: Cannibalism?
« Reply #83 on: March 20, 2016, 02:29:42 PM »
Indeed; I believe his disciples SS Addai and Mari assisted him with liturgical matters...

What does that even mean?

Quote
In the case of the East Syriac liturgy of Ss. Addai and Mari, perhaps this lacks the usual institution narrative because the Apostle Thomas, when he served the Eucharist to the Christians in Edessa, Babylon and India, did not have access to the written gospels or 1 Corinthians, and so instead recounted the Last Supper from memory, describing what happened as opposed to quoting the specific dialogue, and his assistants, the Holy Apostles Addai and Mari, continued in this tradition.

By this logic, he could just as easily have remembered the words used on that occasion and incorporated them into his prayer.  He wouldn't need any of the NT books to give him the text of words he heard with his own ears.  Besides, tradition tells us that St Thomas had with him a copy of St Matthew's Gospel, so there goes the "no access to written gospels" argument. 

Really, let's not read modern ideas into a fantastical imagination of the past.     

Quote
This is just an educated guess on my part; I do think it obvious however that the ancient liturgy of Addai and Mari does reflect the influence of St. Thomas...

How so?